Teach
03-23-2008, 10:30 AM
"Darn it, Walt, I missed that six-footer." "Yeh, I know," I said, "You lipped the cup." "Let's move on to the next hole," my buddy and teaching colleague, Bill, suggested. I then said, "Wait a minute; no one's behind us. Why don't you try that putt, again. Maybe you can see where you misread it." "Naw," Bill said, "Let's just move on...maybe I can get that stroke back on the 6th."
That conversation that took place several years ago has everything to do with the game of golf, but nothing to do with handicapping harness races. But whoa! Wait a minute. Just maybe there is a connection. Now, I'm not necessarily suggesting you go back over every race you lost to see why your horse didn't win; yet, that idea does have merit.
Fellow forum members, what I'm talking about here is seeing how you do at different tracks.
Let's back up. Years ago, when I was a young man, I would frequent tracks here in MA. There was the harness track, Foxboro Raceway; the thoroughbred and occasional harness track, Suffolk Downs; and the thoroughbred/harness track just over the border in southern NH called Rockingham.
Frankly, as I look back, I never kept records at any of the tracks as to how I did. It just didn't seem necessary, nor something I even thought about. However, in recent months, I've started my own web site: www.harnessmaven.com (http://www.harnessmaven.com). During the course of the past few months I've kept archives of the various tracks I've handicapped, e.g., Freehold, The Meadowlands, Yonkers, Monticello, etc. I've found that, in general, I've done better on the 1/2 mile ovals than I have on the "big mile" at "The Big M."
Before I go one, I will say that the differences in my handicapping skills at the
1/2 milers are not that much better than at The Meadowlands. Going back to January of this year, I'm 32%, 33%, and 31% at Freehold, Monticello, and Yonkers, respectively; while at the Meadowlands I'm 29%, overall.
What does this say to me? Well, at first blush, it says that I do better at handicapping winners on 1/2mile tracks than the one-mile ovals. At least that's the premise the data seems to support. Yet, of what good is this information?
In my opinion, it says that if I were betting on the harness races for my own account, I would do better to wager on the 1/2 mile tracks than the larger ovals. At this point, I might mention as an aside that "I cut my teeth" on Foxboro Raceway's half-mile track nearly 50 years ago. In fact, years later, when Foxboro went to a 5/8ths configuration, I found it an adjustment; my handicapping skills slipped.
Oh, I might also mention that The Meadowlands may be tougher for other reasons than its configuration. For one, the drivers are among the best in North America; that makes it harder. There are very few "easy" races. Finally, although the outside posts are usually a disadvantage at mile tracks; I believe they are less so than at 1/2 mile ones.
As usual, I've been too long-winded. But the point I'm trying to make is: In this day and age of simulcasting and a choice of a variety of tracks to wager on --- you might ask yourself: At which ones do I do my best handicapping?
Oh, by the way, my buddy Bill -- he did take me up on my suggestion to go back over his missing putts (playing considerations permitting). In any event, I recall him telling me that's he knocked a couple strokes off his handicap. Just maybe, you can add a couple dollars to your wallet.
That conversation that took place several years ago has everything to do with the game of golf, but nothing to do with handicapping harness races. But whoa! Wait a minute. Just maybe there is a connection. Now, I'm not necessarily suggesting you go back over every race you lost to see why your horse didn't win; yet, that idea does have merit.
Fellow forum members, what I'm talking about here is seeing how you do at different tracks.
Let's back up. Years ago, when I was a young man, I would frequent tracks here in MA. There was the harness track, Foxboro Raceway; the thoroughbred and occasional harness track, Suffolk Downs; and the thoroughbred/harness track just over the border in southern NH called Rockingham.
Frankly, as I look back, I never kept records at any of the tracks as to how I did. It just didn't seem necessary, nor something I even thought about. However, in recent months, I've started my own web site: www.harnessmaven.com (http://www.harnessmaven.com). During the course of the past few months I've kept archives of the various tracks I've handicapped, e.g., Freehold, The Meadowlands, Yonkers, Monticello, etc. I've found that, in general, I've done better on the 1/2 mile ovals than I have on the "big mile" at "The Big M."
Before I go one, I will say that the differences in my handicapping skills at the
1/2 milers are not that much better than at The Meadowlands. Going back to January of this year, I'm 32%, 33%, and 31% at Freehold, Monticello, and Yonkers, respectively; while at the Meadowlands I'm 29%, overall.
What does this say to me? Well, at first blush, it says that I do better at handicapping winners on 1/2mile tracks than the one-mile ovals. At least that's the premise the data seems to support. Yet, of what good is this information?
In my opinion, it says that if I were betting on the harness races for my own account, I would do better to wager on the 1/2 mile tracks than the larger ovals. At this point, I might mention as an aside that "I cut my teeth" on Foxboro Raceway's half-mile track nearly 50 years ago. In fact, years later, when Foxboro went to a 5/8ths configuration, I found it an adjustment; my handicapping skills slipped.
Oh, I might also mention that The Meadowlands may be tougher for other reasons than its configuration. For one, the drivers are among the best in North America; that makes it harder. There are very few "easy" races. Finally, although the outside posts are usually a disadvantage at mile tracks; I believe they are less so than at 1/2 mile ones.
As usual, I've been too long-winded. But the point I'm trying to make is: In this day and age of simulcasting and a choice of a variety of tracks to wager on --- you might ask yourself: At which ones do I do my best handicapping?
Oh, by the way, my buddy Bill -- he did take me up on my suggestion to go back over his missing putts (playing considerations permitting). In any event, I recall him telling me that's he knocked a couple strokes off his handicap. Just maybe, you can add a couple dollars to your wallet.