Ray Taulbot

[MANOWAR]

Does anyone know when Ray Taulbot died?

I have a funny feeling that a few of "his" angles posted at American Turf Monthly weren't written by him.

[JustMissed]

Which angles in particuliar give you that "funny feeling"?

JustMissed

[so.cal.fan]

He died many years ago, Man O War.
I don't know exactly when, but back in the 60's I think.
Someone told me that there have been several authors that used his name for articles, I really don't know.....anyone?

[MANOWAR]

I don't know exactly which angles, but the copyright dates at the bottom of the pages reads late 1990's. I thought I read somewhere that Ray had died 30 years ago. I'm not quite sure though. I could be wrong. Now maybe those copyright dates mean nothing, but if Ray did die 30 years ago you would have to wonder if Ray did write all of those angles posted at ATM.

[JustMissed]

Originally posted by so.cal.fan
He died many years ago, Man O War.
I don't know exactly when, but back in the 60's I think.
Someone told me that there have been several authors that used his name for articles, I really don't know.....anyone?

I think I read the same thing, maybe on this board. He was an employee of ATM and I believe the articles he wrote are probably the property of ATM and they can reprint them whenever they want to and probably edit and update as they deem appropriate.

I hope ManOWar will let us know which ones he has suspicion about. I have enough trouble with good angles, I don't need to be using any bad ones, that's for sure.

JustMissed


:)

[Lefty]

Ray died in the 60's. But they have rewrote and reprinted his angles ever since. Prob. when they put it in the magazine the copyright reflects the date of the magazine.

[CapperLou]

"One of the Shrewdest Handicappers I've Ever Met"

I had the good fortune of meeting Ray in the early 60's and going to the track many times with him at Garden State and Atlantic City.

He passed away in the late 60's if I recall exactly. I knew Henry Bomze, the founder of American Turf Monthly and it was thru him that I met Ray, who lived in New Jersey. He taught me so much--it's hard to desribe.

I still use a few of his angles as spot plays successfully today.
The magazine is reprinting much of his stuff because they have the copyrights to it all as far as I know.

He was IMHO one of the top handicappers of his time. The only person I have met who was in his class or perhaps even smarter since then is William L Scott--and he passed away over ten years ago also. Scott's stuff--if you know how to pick your spots--still works very well and I use it to this day.

What has affected the above more than anything else is the use of all the drugs on horses today compared to then--that's why today you also have to carefully follow trainers and their patterns etc. if you want to be profitable.

Hope this helps!!!


CapperLou

[GR1@HTR]

Capper...You must be older than the hills...Good story though...

[MANOWAR]

Some of the rules to these angles need to be reworked for today's play. I believe ATM didn't do enough updating on some angles. Take for example that most of the angles tell you to eliminate a horse that hasn't started within 15 days on the same track or circuit. Day after day I see horses win races after a 30 day layoff or more. Are you going to ignore the horse because it last raced at Belmont and today's race is at Gulfstream. The horse may qualify on all other rules except the recency rule. If you play exactly according to the rules and ignore the horse, it may come back to bite you. You may be kicking yourself later because the horse qualified on all rules except the recency rule. There goes a $40.00 BOMB! As we all know, a horse that comes back within 15 days doesn't guarantee a win.

A few angles tell you to look for a horse moving up in class that didn't win its last race and wasn't claimed from its last race. You can understand why this rule is part of the method. This rule is either hit or miss. I don't believe in this rule either. Some horses do come back and win after they've been claimed.

Like CapperLou said, you have to CAREFULLY follow trainer patterns.

[CapperLou]

GR1----Well, Not really---2 score and 1--nearing 3 score!!!

I feel like 35-40--can't believe how fast time goes by--for you younger dudes--don't waste any time---be productive whether it's work or play----you cannot get it back---we all make the trip once--so take advantage of every minute you can!!!

All the best,

CapperLou

[tcat]

Now that we have our own data bases to test everything, it would be interesting to test these old angles.
Unfortunately, Scotts angles have not stood up too well to testing.
Did you find any angles of Talbot's that have been productive?

[CapperLou]

tcat:

I would be interested in knowing what "angles" or method of play of W.L. Scott have "not held up to well in a database test".

Like lots of other angles or methods of play one has to learn how and when to play in order to be profitable.

I have not tested any of Taulbot's angles thru a database, but have used just a few of them over many years at certain tracks and they have been productive. The hard part is that some work at certain tracks and not at others etc.

Thanks for any input you may have on 1st paragraph in particular.

CapperLou

[Jaguar]

Mr. Taulbot's articles are routinely re-written and updated for today's tracks by the folks at ATM.

When I was testing them in the mid-to-late 80's, they were roughly 20 percent accurate. I suspect that would not be the case now, because the heavy use of chemical enhancements has wrecked alot of the old form cycle and impact value stats which I used to live by.

Today, a broken down plater with a bowed tendon feels no pain when his hoof hits a paste board strip and- particularly if he's had a bit of a layoff- he can come back fresh as a daisy and bury the field. I see it every week.

Mr. Taulbot was a heckuva handicapper, and I highly recommend his little "book" entitled "Positive Factor Handicapping", for anyone starting out in the handicapping field and hungry for insights into the mysteries of handicapping claimers.

A former editor at ATM, who worked with Ray Taulbot, told me that Taulbot earned steady money at the track.

Wish I had met him.

By the way, I couldn't agree with Lou more- Trainers are more important than ever today.

All the best,

Jaguar

[MANOWAR]

In my opinion, Ray's angles work best on the larger circuits than on the smaller circuits.

Too many cheap horses and too much "monkey business" at these smaller tracks for Ray's angles to work consistantly.

[tcat]

Jaguar, do you know anyone selling Talbot's book?

Capper, a few years ago, my handicapping class focused on Scotts books. He was a very, very good writer, but when we tested some of his angles, they just didn't work. Of course, times change and maybe things are different now. But, at the time, I was really disapointed.

I have learned however, that there are a lot of people selling stuff and passing themselves off as experts, that are not what they say they are.

[JustMissed]

Originally posted by tcat
Now that we have our own data bases to test everything, it would be interesting to test these old angles.
Unfortunately, Scotts angles have not stood up too well to testing.
Did you find any angles of Talbot's that have been productive?

tcat-If you have the time, would you mind posting which of Mr. Scott's angles specifically have quit working?

When you make a general statement that "Scotts angles have not stood up too well to testing", do you mean some or all or sometimes or all the time, etc. Very confusing!

Thanks for your help.

JustMissed

[CapperLou]

tcat:

I'll second justmissed's request of you.

As I have mentioned earlier on this thread--I have used Scott's TVATT for many years--and knowing HOW and WHEN and WHERE to use it--I have been profitable.

I'm very interested in knowing the specifics of your research as justmissed requested. Curiosity has gotten the best of me!!!

CapperLou

[MANOWAR]

I'm assuming that the Ray Taulbot Pace Calculator has changed over the years also. I'm guessing it worked best back when Ray was still living than it does today.

[Jaguar]

TCat, try ATM on Long Island, they used to sell it.

Reason stuff doesn't work anymore is due to the tremendous changes which have swept through the horse game in the last 15 years. Most of the old truths(layoffs, etc.) don't apply today. It's no longer a horse game per se, but a trainer game.

This is why the A. I. programs assign different values- or weights- to the algorithms used to evaluate horses' past performances, compared to the statistical values- or weights- the A. I. programs assigned to those same criteria in the past.

An example from the market place: years ago the paper an pencil methods, as well as the handicapping discs, typically credited the "trainer/jockey" connection with minimal relative influence on the program's final rating for a horse.

Most of those old-fashioned methods have disappeared like the wife's lover from the second-floor bedroom window when the husband puts his key in the front door.

If you look at the "expert systems" discs or the A. I. programs for sale today, you will note that they all attribute much higher values to the trainer/jockey nexus than handicapping programs did in the past.

Of course, all this has to be seen within the context of a complete handicapping package. The speed and pace guys will always win their share of races, but the connections players will tend to get the value.

One day soon, the public may shift their focus to a horse's connections. When the bettors do wake up, the connections players will be hitting 4/5 shots every day. I'll have to give up the game and take that job as a short-order cook in New Mexico, they've promised me a bunk in the shed behind the motel. Wonder if there's room in there for my computer?

All the best,

Jaguar

[ranchwest]

Originally posted by CapperLou
tcat:

I'll second justmissed's request of you.

As I have mentioned earlier on this thread--I have used Scott's TVATT for many years--and knowing HOW and WHEN and WHERE to use it--I have been profitable.

I'm very interested in knowing the specifics of your research as justmissed requested. Curiosity has gotten the best of me!!!

CapperLou

I agree. Scott was on the right track. You have to study the situations in which the factors are most effective, but the foundation is definitely there.

[Big Bill]

As I recall, Scott did not consider a horse who won its last race a contender unless the win was a "big win". And that was defined as being in the lead at the second call but not by more than two lengths, gaining ground in the stretch, and then finishing three or more lengths ahead.

How do members of this board feel about horses who have won their last race being contenders in their next race? Has anyone tested Scott's theory on that condition?

Big Bill

[keenang]

BILL
I REMEMBER AT A SEMINAR WITH TIM BROHAMMER AND I THINK HE SAID CLAIMING HORSES REPEAT WINS ABOUT 8%. NOT VERY GOOD.
GENE

[CapperLou]

BigBill etal:

As you know from my posts on this thread and others I am a believer in Scott's methods.

I have saved "thousands" of dollars over the years by eliminating any last out winners who were not a "Big Win" according to Scott.
I have seen the others lose and lose and lose. And---I have won so many times when a Big Win last out winner was in a race today who qualified as the top pick.
Even if there is a "Big Win" horse in a race who is the top pick I will not play him if there are any other last out winners in the same race and that has been a very wise decision over time.
If you are using Scott's methods, I would suggest you play only the major tracks across the country.
The same could be said for Ray Taulbot's angles. AND, like Jaguar mentioned earlier----

You better know something about trainers today when a play comes up on any of the above or you will be UP AGAINST IT as they say.

Today, YOU MUST factor in the trainers and all the drugs and chemicals they use on their horses to get them to the wire first!!!

All the best,

CapperLou

[cj]

Originally posted by CapperLou
...
Today, YOU MUST factor in the trainers and all the drugs and chemicals they use on their horses to get them to the wire first!!!
...
CapperLou

I'm not saying this can't work, but to say you MUST is a little much. I rarely know who trains or even rides the horses I bet on, and I am doing just fine.

CJ

[CapperLou]

cjmilkowski:

It's not written in stone, but I think it will increase your ROI. I can be profitable with Scott's stuff, as you suggest you are, without even looking at trainers or jockeys etc.

I have increased my ROI by watching trainer/jockey patterns on these plays etc.--that's all--just a good filter.

Thanks for your good post--glad to clarify what I wrote.

CapperLou

[tcat]

Hey guys, I'm not trying to knock someone who's not here anymore. Perhaps we need to define what works and what dosen't. The big race last time you mention does win sometimes, but roi is not productive. So if you can't make money on a play, then it doesn't work. If that is not what you mean I stand corrected.

I remember a certain author telling about a great play when a certain trainer raced a horse at a certain distance off a layoff. When I checked it, I had 2 ($6.00) winners out of 22 starts. You tell me, is that a great play? If it is, then I again stand corrected and apologise to all.

This is a tough game.

[MANOWAR]

Tell me, why did we go from talking about Ray Taulbot to talking about W.L. Scott?

To tell you the truth, I don't even know who W. L. Scott was. It sounds like he was another angle writer.

No offense, but I'm more interested in learning more about Ray Taulbot and his angles.

[CapperLou]

tcat:

You are correct about the Big Win as a stand alone spot play.
It will not produce a positive ROI on its own.

I was referring to all my plays (which include big wins)and the way I have filtered them.

This sure as heck is A VERY TOUGH GAME!!!!

OH, and a free piece of advice for all reading this thread:: If you think you can win playing TVATT on the turf--you better go out and get a higher paying job---!!!!!!!

CapperLou

[Tom]

I have Angle A, but does anyone know what Angle B is?
I think I asked this a couple of years ago, but I don't remember if I ever got an answer, or if I did, what it was. Senior moment.
Like when I go to pour my coffe and I already poured it and then I have to mop up the kitchen.

[CapperLou]

MANOWAR:

Sorry about that!!! Taulbot was the angle writer.

Scott was a method of play author.

CapperLou

[Hosshead]

Ray Taulbot-- When talking about Class, used to say---Class, is the reason Horse A (with class adv.), Can beat Horse B (with less class),--in a time, that is slower than Horse B normally runs! He had so many angles. I used to buy ATM just to read Ray. He even had an Also-Eligible angle. It dealt with playing horses on the AE list that got in, and were coming off of a VERY recent race (7or 10 days I think). The logic was,- why would a trainer try to run him back so fast off the AE list unless the horse was Very Live!

[ranchwest]

Originally posted by Big Bill
As I recall, Scott did not consider a horse who won its last race a contender unless the win was a "big win". And that was defined as being in the lead at the second call but not by more than two lengths, gaining ground in the stretch, and then finishing three or more lengths ahead.

How do members of this board feel about horses who have won their last race being contenders in their next race? Has anyone tested Scott's theory on that condition?

Big Bill

Scott didn't eliminate winners. He downplayed them and marked a "w" in his notations.

A "big win" wasn't the only requirement for a play. Scott had three form groupings plus PCR and ability time. It takes all of that to be a top play. So, you might say that the big win was in a category that made up 20% of his overall methodology.

Scott also described lesser plays that didn't require a big win.

Instead of tearing off of Scott's work to find a play, you really need to add on to it to get the most out of it.

[dogfish]

ok,i am knew here but have read all the books .just seems to me if you guy's would spend more time looking at tomorrow's form than debating what happened or what system worked you might pick a winner tomorrow.why not discuss what may happen tomorrow with you own opinion scott,talbout did this and sold us a lot books.:rolleyes:

[ranchwest]

Certainly nothing wrong with looking at tomorrow with commentary.

Nothing wrong with keeping records so that sound opinions of yesterday are possible, too.

Give a man a fish? Teach a man to fish?

[PaceAdvantage]

dogfish,

There's room for lots of different types of discussion, debate and whatnot on this board.....


Carry on,

==PA

[midnight]

According to the Social Security Death Index (SSDI), which you can find at ancestry.com, Ray Taulbot died in December of 1969, and was 74 years old at the time. He last lived in Camden New Jersey.

Taulbot's name has been absolutely bastardized by his former employer, American Turf Monthly, who keep him alive by priniting rewrites of his articles regularly in their magazine. It wouldn't suprise me a bit if some of the articles he was supposed to have written were ghosted by somebody else. It's a pity, because the man knew handicapping long before anybody else had a clue about it.

[JimL]

I for one am glad that ATM, still carries his articles. Have noticed they change very little. I still use a pace and speed chart from his book, Playing For Profit. The chart is dated however all horses are subjected to it.

[Derek2U]

Your post RE the discussion of past stuff shows a blank brain.
I think the question, --How do we handle a horse with a Last
Race Win?" -- is a great question. I have just a minor comment
about that situation .... I AM immediately suspicious that the
horse shot its BEST in that win --- and that, most likely, he will
NOT repeat that fig today. I do modify my brain with a few
situations: Wire-2-Wire vs Pressing vs Deep Closing; AND, then, Was it On-The-Turf or Dirt AND Sprint vs Route. A lot of money is
Over-Bet on a Horse who Wins-Its-Last and so that question
seems important. And, DogFish, with a record-breaking 14 posts
to your credit, I can quickly see How Many, Many times You Have
analysed a race & shared your selections.

[CapperLou]

Midnight:

Great Post!!!!! You are right on the MONEY about Ray.
As you know from my previous post--I knew him for several years and he was one of the best handicappers and teachers I have ever met---and he taught me so much when I was very young.

Anyway----it's warming up here today and I'm on my way to Gulfstream in just a couple of minutes.

Hope everyone has a profitable race day!!!

CapperLou

[MANOWAR]

Does anyone know if Ray Taulbot ever wrote a book of angles and methods? If so, I wonder If any out of print book stores might have a copy. I still would be interested in reviewing his original angles and methods even though they're out of date. Does anyone know of any excellent out of print book stores on the web that might help me with my search?

[KyRacer]

ManOWar

This is repost from an eariler thread. It list what I know about Ray's works. The Racing Angles book has appeared twice on ebay in the last three years as far as I know. I love to see his angles readjusted for recency and class moves and then researched. Some of the angles involved moves up or down in class of $500. I'm not sure a move of $500 is that much of a move now days. I think Ray used his pace methods to get contenders and the angles to seperate them and make picks.

repost:

Ray Taulbot had several other works besides "Playing For Profit". In 1951 he published "Pace and Composite Handicapping". A 187 page soft cover book. In 1955, "Improved Pace Handicapping" came out. It was 43 pages. In 1964 he authored "Racing Angles", a 109 page soft cover book explaining 55 angles.

In the back of Racing Angles, it list other works by the author which included, 19 Lessons on Pace and Composite Handicapping, 10 Lessons On Racing Angles, 10 Lessons on Final Procedure, Thr Price Profit Method, and The Professional Method. The lessons were 24 pages long and include personal help and assistance during the study period according to the book.

KyBen

[4thandlong]

Go here (http://www.abebooks.com) and search for Ray's books. They have many.

[andicap]

Originally posted by ManOWar
Tell me, why did we go from talking about Ray Taulbot to talking about W.L. Scott?

To tell you the truth, I don't even know who W. L. Scott was. It sounds like he was another angle writer.

No offense, but I'm more interested in learning more about Ray Taulbot and his angles.

Real name: Joseph Finley, was the father of NY Times writer Bill Finley.

[MANOWAR]

andicap

Who is Joseph Finley? W.L. Scott

[CapperLou]

MANOWAR:

Wliiliam L Scott was the pen name of Joseph Finley, who was a very well known attorney in the Washington DC area. He happened to love the horses and being the brilliant lawyer he was--he wanted to figure out a way to win at the track.

I think he did a darn well---his help and books turned me from a once in awhile winner to a positive ROI.

He did not write angles---he wrote three books on exactly how to play the races.
His son is a handicapper for one of the papers in New York!!

CapperLou

[BillW]

His pen name was the names of his 3 kids William, Lucinda(?) and Scott.

[Lefty]

4hand, went to that site, searched for Ray Taulbot, came up with 30 books--all the same one!

[4thandlong]

Ooops! I just quickly glanced at the list and saw many different dates. Didn't realize they are just different editions of the same book!

[Richard]

Man O' War,
If your interested in Ray Taulbot,go to:
www.americanturf.com/atm/atmindex.htm
Then click on the link to Ray Taulbot articles.

[MANOWAR]

Richard

I've been to ATM several times and have reviewed Ray Taulbot's reworked angles several times over. Out of the 30 angles, (If I remember correctly, there's a few that aren't even angles.) I don't think there's one angle that works on a consistant basis anymore. We've been over this already on why angles don't work consistantly like they used to.

By trade I'm a pace handicapper. I wouldn't normally play angles. Unfortunately for me, I have no other choice right now but to play angles.

[Tom]

I was fortunate enough to meet him at a Sartin seminar in Baltimore - the infamous "hot night" seminar when the fire alarms sent us fleeing into the night. He gave us a Beyer-figure contender selection method to get contenders for the methodolgy. It was something like this:
1. Look at the top two races for each horse.
2. Circle the best beyer of the last two.
3. The top three horses ranked this way are contenders.
4. Now ignore the top two races and look at the remaining eight.
5. Circle each horse's highest Beyer in this group and again, the top three are contenders.
You now have 3-6 contenders.
I found it useful at the time but haven't used it lately. I do remember it included some nice prices that I would never have used normally. The contenders are seperated by pace analysis and two horse were bet to win.

[formula_2002]

Just looking through some old stuff.
I have ATM's that go back to 1953...I remember going into their NY offices in the early 70's to get a bunch of back issues.

At the Time I was interested in Howard Rowe's (the editor) work.

I tried to get something published about Dick Dutrow (sr)..I still have the piece..maybe I'll put it up on my web page....I'll publish it myself (lol).

Joe M

[Shacopate]

One of my favorite days at the track came two days before my senior prom using one of Ray Taulbots angles. I only had 30 bucks and didn't want to borrow money from my folks for the prom, so I skipped class and drove to Keeneland.

I don't remember the name of the angle, but here was the play.

I bet a horse that finished out of the money in his last start that showed two previous in the money finishes. He met the qualifiers. Last race 14 days or less and two in the money finishes at same class or higher.

He won at 14-1 and my 20 dollar win bet felt like a million.

I just wish I hadn't forgotten the corsage.

[oldstuff]

Am an 'old' time handicapper.

Talbot had an angle which works very well and was the one which he gave the highest rating to:

If the horse gained 2 1/2 lengths in the stretch in it's last start
and if it won or finished within 5 lengths in last start, it was
to be considered a top contender.
If this horse was within 3 1/2 lengths of the leader at the
stretch call in it's last race, coupled with the above, it is
the top angle.

I'm surprised to see importance of a 14 day figure interjected into his works for he always referred to 28 maximum and 11 or 12 as the optimum assuming a trainer should run back within 7 days if possible but he allowed 4 days for the trainer to find a suitable condition for his horse.

In his earlier years he discounted weight but in later years used weight as a guideline for class. It was this writing that made me alot of money at the track. I still use weight as a factor.

I'm brand new to this board. Glad to find it.

[Tom]

Welcome. This is a great board to talk horses. Take my advice, go back and read the old posts - there is lot of good stuf buried here.
Always nice to see new "faces", so welcome, and look forward to chatting with you. And thanks for the Talbout info...always enjoy to hear what someone else is doing out there.

[JimL]

Oldstuff, nice to read your post. His class weight angles still work well at the Ohio tracks due to the conditioned claimers running at these tracks. I think these angles remain posted on the ATM site. Can you think of any other Taulbot angles that could still be effective? Jim

[oldstuff]

I have a list of all his revised angles as incorporated into his Pace Calculator and the weight he gives to each.

If you would be interested in this please let me know. I shall be happy to email them to you or post them on this site for everyone to peruse. There is nothing proprietary about them as I talked with the programmer who stated he doesn't remember much about the program which he developed about 6 years ago.

I found out that using Talbots 'highlight' (raw) pace ratings and using a modified system of Sartin for variance really works well to this date. Surprisingly well. Also, when using his 'angles' it also have quite a bit of merit. Of special interest is the fact that there is better ROI using DRF rating and modified variance than using the Bris ratings.

Oldstuff

[GameTheory]

Post, post -- let's see the nuts & bolts.

[oldstuff]

Ok, here is Talbots weightings: (add to raw pace rating)

1. Finished in the money last start 6.5
2. Finished in the money last two starts 3.1
3. Showed early speed last start 6.2
4. Out of the money last start, in the money
next to last start 6.1
5. Out of the money last sart, early speed
in next to last start 5.6
6. Out of the money last two races,
in the money third race back 5.1
7. Within 3 1/2 lengths of the leader at the
stretch call in last start 7.0
8. Dropping in class today 5.9
9. Dropped in class last start 8.2
10. Dropped in class in next to last start,
same class last start 5.1
11. Gained 2 1/2 lengths in the stretch in last start 7.0
12. Qualifier for #11 that won or finished within
5 lengths in last start 5.2
13. Started within the past 14 days 6.1
14. Started within the past 15 to 20 days 4.3
15. Started within the past 21 to 35 days 2.1
16. Started at the track where racing today 6.3
17. One win in current chart 5.0
18. Two wins in current chart 6.0
19. Three wins in current chart 7.5

I do know that #13 and #15 are incorrect from Talbots writings:
In #13, he used 11 days and not 14.
In #15, he used 28 days and not 35.
There was no such thing as variance published when he was writing and he used weight as a factor but those weightings are not in the above data.

[JimL]

Nice to read of your success with the calculator. I use it to. Dont use the DRF variant or speed rating as I prefer the amer-var rating for speed and variance. I find it works better than my class pars that I did for some time. Do you realize that you and I could be the only people in the USA, that still use the calculator! Could be a good thing! Jim

[Speed Figure]

Someone from this great board e-mail me a DOS version of the Pace Calculator some time ago.It's a manual entry version and it works great. :cool:

[BIG HIT]

Hi guy's i bought the program thought it would have all his angle in it.When read the manual found out it didn't really disapapointed.The angle it used were only for position and length.Did give raw pace though.Stop using it as it used only $1.00 bris files.
And equisim\propace gave more info that i use and use tsn files and are more accurate. Did anybody else buy it and have any luck.?

[Lefty]

You can also use TSN files in the Pace Calculator; just rename them to the same ext as the Bris file.

[anglemaster]

I was reading this thread with great interest and noted that somebody was asking what the "B" angle is/was .

The B angle is a second race back angle where the subject horse finished out of the money in his last start. In his second last race the horse was Less than 3-3/4 length from the leader for both the first and second call.
This is a very powerful angle and can lead to some very handsome payoffs combined with other Taulbot angles.

John

[Tom]

That was me asking. Thanks for the info.

[anglemaster]

Sorry Tom I was in such a hurry that I forgot to post that in the second race back the horse must be within 3.5 lengths at both the first and second call, but the horse must also lose lengths from the second call to the final call, must get beat by more than 3-3/4 lengths and preferably not hit the board.

sorry for the incomplete post.

John

[MANOWAR]

That B angle sounds like another angle of Ray's called the Speed Prep Angle. Anyone know if the Speed Prep Angle was originated by Ray?

[BeatTheChalk]

I knew Ray personally ..way back when .. He and his wife were
operating out of their modest home in New Jersey. I recall
taking 10 lessons from Ray. He would send out the lessons
and we would send back our answers !!
The thing about the " Angles " is this ... It takes quite a while
to look at each horse to see .. what angles are present. Very
good stuff tho. As for the Pace Calculator .. I had one of them
but somewhere down the line ... it got lost.
I use Aodds and Thoromation .. been a Sartin player since the
80's. Howard spoke highly of Ray .. and in fact had a two
part artilce in American Turf Monthy .. discussing the use of
the Calculator.
After Ray passed away .. his wife kept the business going as
best she could for a few more years. When she finally decided
to call it quits..she send me a very nice book ..with a listing of
all of THE ANGLES and a discussion thereof.
Finally . Ray came from a different era .. and always preached
RECENCY. He had examples going back to the forties ..where
the horses raced every 5 days or so !

[Richard]

I also maintain AMER-VAR speed numbers and variants for GP,PHA,SA,and BM.The California tracks are considerably faster.

[BeatTheChalk]

Ray died in the early 60's maybe the late 50's. I talked with
him on the phone twice. Memories fade...but I know his wife
kept the business going for some period of time.
She was kind enough to send me a book that contained
all of the angles with explanations. It was printed in 1964.
Much of the information - is based on a different era .. a
different time of racing. I was attempting ..( in those long ago
days of the 60's and 0's ) to work with the angles and the
Positive handicapping factors. It was labor intensive to the
max. I can still recall the pp's that Ray would use as examples :
4000 claimers from Jamaica and Washington Park !
Ray had handicapping lessons through the mail .. 10 for the
first round..10 more for the second. I stopped there. He would
actually send back a handwritten letter .. with an explanation
of the races. God I am feeling old. He was very friendly with
Henry Bomze. He and Huey Mall used to go round and round as well ....

[JimL]

Richard, I see you are using AMER-VAR, to get your variants and speed figures. Do you then use the pace calculator to rate the races? I still think it is a perfectly legitimate way to play. A PBS number adjusted for track speed is a valid concept. PM me if you want. JimL

[BeatTheChalk]

Whoa I recall I was at a seminar .. when Pizzola and Bradshaw
and Doc introduced the concept ! Been a while...Cant exactly recall how to arrive at the number. Would love to see the formula
again. I remember Jimmy giving the presentation ... If you
know JImmy .. you know how that went :) I sincerely believe
that his Aodds is theee finest method in the world....to find the
contenders.

[Lefty]

Beat, I doubt that Bradshaw presented it, he didn't like much of what Pizzolla did. He hated the fulcrum, for instance. If Pizzolla was there he prob presented the formula. It's in his book "Handicapping Magic."
Actually, the Pace Calculator gives you The Pace of the Race.

[keenang]

beat the chalk


AMEN ON A-ODDS. WHAT VERSION DO YOU HAVE? I WAS A LITTLE UNHAPPY WHEN BRISNET UPPED THE PRICE ON FILES. I HAVE AN OLD VERSION. I THINK IT IS A-ODDS PLUS. HOW DO YOU GET THE LATEST VERSION?


GOOD LUCK
GENE

[JimL]

Lefty, you are right, the pace calculator gives you the pace of the race however when you use AMER-VAR, you end up with a speed rating that is adjusted for track variant. This number lends its self I feel as a more accurate basis for PBS numbers than the raw DRF, speed rating.
You are right on your second point also; Bradshaw did not like PBS! JimL

[Blackgold]

I rarely play a race off of PBS.

But, PPF. . .it's a powerful number and has served me well, especially when you have a lot of track to track adjustments- the PPF is dead on.

And the Fulcrum has served me well also, especially since it often shows up ITM (or 4th for superfecta wagers). The Fulcrum greatly aids in simplifying exotic wager structure.

[BeatTheChalk]

You are correct regards the Presentation of the PBS....In fact
I see the error of my ways. I now agree that Michael
( Pizzola ) made the presentation in Vegas. In fact I had a little
hand out that was given to the folks at the seminar..but It is
long gone. I also recall that there was a segment at one of
seminars...about " extracting the third fraction " Can you
imagine having to do all that by hand ? Scuse me while I go read
a little humor from Huey Mahl and his Broadsheet :!!

[Tom]

At theSaratoga seminar in, I believe 1988? - the one they wrote a book about, where Townhouse finished 2nd off a one year layoff and Doc had him-thought he ran there THAT year, not a year before....fulcrums and PBS were a major part of the pre-trip analysis, along with the full match up. I have always used the fulcrum on one form or another. I worlkd well with qurrin style pace-speed figs, HTR Pac/Per figures, TRP numbers, BRIS pace numbers.....
The concept of fulcrum and how horses have run against it is just one way to visualize the pace of race and what the real match up will be. For me, it the most fun part of the whole game.

[JimL]

I know some users of TMM, that have stopped using PBS, and as Black Gold, indicated use the PPF, numbers exclusively. They work and they are good however I feel a well crafted speed rating would certainly make PBS, more useful.
When you think of it the PBS, number is the pace of race, adjusted by the second call. Just what Ray Taulbot, did! JimL

[BeatTheChalk]

Can you please let me know how to find the PPF number ?
Thanks ?

[Lefty]

Beat, the complete PPF formula with all adjustments is also in the book "Handicapping Magic"

[Richard]

I do use the Pace Calculator to help seperate the contenders from non-contenders.But I cant help but wonder should the angle questions be revised to reflect ant changes since they were first written(e.g.:lasix usage,turf and or mud rating numbers,workout frequency).Perhaps a good project for the knowledgable members of this board(which pretty much cuts me out)would be to suggest revisions in the angle questions to update them as needed.
Richard

[DeoVolente]

I think Nick Borg's articles in ATM are as good as Talbot's were years ago. Nick's monthly articles are the reason I buy and read ATM.