PLEASE HANDICAP RACE 3 AT MONMOUTH - 7/31

[menifee]

I consider myself an excellent post race handicapper. I can usually tell you why that horse won on paper after the race had been run. It use to drive my father nuts, but after watching Harvey Pack for years it is a skill you develop as he was the master at it.

Please watch Race 3 at Monmouth on 7/31. I've looked at the form a million different ways and I still cannot find the 3 horse. I did not play the race, I just watch the replays from Monmouth at night.

There are a lot of excellent handicappers on here. I know some are class handicappers, pace handicappers, number guys, pedigree, etc. Can one of you please explain to me how anybody could come up with this horse? The horse was 33-1 in a seven horse field, so somebody played him.

[sammy the sage]

cheap mafia MONEY LAUNDRY RACE.... :rolleyes:...what you'd expect :kiss:

only play the BIG race's now...then KNOW everybody's giving that 150% effort...roids, shakes, secret works ect!

[KMS]

First of all, I don't bet maidens and even if I did, I wouldn't have picked this horse, so I'm not redboarding. With that out of the way, I see some positives here...

1. Last race was 22 days ago. I like a horse to have run within three weeks, and that's close enough.

2. Didn't stink up the joint in any of the last three races, and improved either finish position or beaten lengths each time.

3. Sprinter stretching out in a race with only one other horse likely to challenge for the lead.

4. Nobody else looks that impressive. The ML favorite regressed in its last race. A couple of horses finished second last time out, but those type runners are overbet, with no guarantee that they'll close the deal this time either.

That's my ex post facto analysis. It wouldn't have been my pick, but it's not a total shocker in hindsight. I probably would have played the 1 horse and kicked myself all day.

[JBmadera]

would never have played her BUT looking back you can see a minor z pattern: three back she showed some speed, toss the 2nd race back as she was bothered at the start then in her last race she came on well at the end (pp comment: willingly late). guess she finally woke up.


JB

[jonnielu]

I consider myself an excellent post race handicapper. I can usually tell you why that horse won on paper after the race had been run. It use to drive my father nuts, but after watching Harvey Pack for years it is a skill you develop as he was the master at it.

Please watch Race 3 at Monmouth on 7/31. I've looked at the form a million different ways and I still cannot find the 3 horse. I did not play the race, I just watch the replays from Monmouth at night.

There are a lot of excellent handicappers on here. I know some are class handicappers, pace handicappers, number guys, pedigree, etc. Can one of you please explain to me how anybody could come up with this horse? The horse was 33-1 in a seven horse field, so somebody played him.

Well, I didn't bet the horse, I'm not following Mth. But, your horse here looks pretty on an Ability-X chart.

3rd - 8.3fD MTH
# POST ErlSpd / ML/Comp

142 6 100 10 242
106 1 91 4.5 197
101 3 88 15 189
110 7 87 2.5 197
154 2 85 2 239
114 5 81 6 195
191 4 0 3 191

The favorite is in blue, and the two other contenders on ability are in orange. Of course, it has been thoroughly explained to me that my ratings are just plain no good because the lowest rating doesn't win every single time. And, this is a huge impediment to succesful horseplay.

Except when the lowest number does win.

On the face of it, you can see that your surprise horse compares well with the favorite here, actually #3 compares with the average winners par of 100/85 better then the favorite does. Bringing that par into mind can help you to see that this race will primarily be contested by these three horses.

Also, with this in mind, the last running line is quite positive.


Often, the information that you really need, is well buried in the PP's.

jdl

[MONEY]

I'm happy to say that I hit that exacta. But it's my lack of handicapping ability that helped.

Yesterday I decided to use my friends trainer statistics and the ML odds to bet $8.00 a race on 7 horse fields. According to his stats the 3 top win % trainers in that race were #6, 17.3%, #2, 16.4% & #3, 15%. The 2 was the ML fav. so I wasn't going to use it in the win position.

So my bet looked like this 3-6/2-3-4-6-7, cost $8.00. The 2, 4 & 7 were the three ML favs. I didn't expect to hit many races betting this way, so that was the last bet that I made on the day.

I guess it goes to show that even simple minded people like myself could have an occasional winning day at the races.

money

[cj's dad]

I guess it goes to show that even simple minded people like myself could have an occasional winning day at the races.


Hey, you're not the only one. Simple minded that is.

[Robert Fischer]

the paper isn't always going to tell you why a horse won. It's a puzzle using all the information available to estimate how likely a horse is to win.

Some key issues to consider:
1. it's not always caught on paper - sometimes the video tells a different story
2. "all the information available" isn't always enough - your horsey has the flu today / lastrace / new drugs / any one of a million variables
3. probability says there will be times when the 7th best horse will win, when the worst horses will win. A terrible horse may have a 1/100 chance to win, but I know I've watched well over a 100 races this year.... You can't just assume that there is some explanation for a winner

In the race in question it was a maiden race, and the filly in question was being stretched out after indicating that she may need more distance.

Once in a while a closing sprinter actually does want more distance.
Doesn't hurt when the company is soft and the track Monmouth:lol:.
Lopez and Huston guessed that she would be happier in striking range at a 48 half than being dusted in 46 halfs. Luckily Cobbler's Reef was a little green or not quite up to the task. It was Tanner's day.

She wasn't IMO a particularly good bet, but hindsight is a tough SOB. I sure would have picked Albertrani's FTS for around 4-1 or 9-2, and then been disgusted when he stayed around 5/2.

[The Hawk]

I implore you guys who can't "figure" out how this horse won to throw away the figures (okay, just for this race) and watch the replays for her last TWO races. She was really moving well at the end of both. She simply needed more ground.

[jotb]

The 3yo filly HOLY TANNER was quite impressive the race before if you watched the race and just do a little simple math. The time of the race was 22.87, 46.55, 59.11, 112.89. She was almost 10.5 lengths behind after the 1st quarter, a tad over 8 lengths at the 1/2 mile, almost 9.5 lengths at the stretch call, and finished 2 1/4 lengths behind the winner at the end of the race. She ran the last 1/4 roughly 25 seconds and finished the last 1/8 in 11.1. That type of move gives this filly a license to run big next out and she did. Don't forget this was only a maiden!

Joe

[jwolpert]

The 3 was a sprinter stretching out to 1m70 for the first time. His final time in his last race - 6f adding beaten lengths was 113 1/5. Even adding a couple of ticks for his transition to a route - translates his second call time to be competitive with the field. From "the pace of the race" standpoint he was second to the 7.
The way this horse closed to get to the 6f was quite impressive. Yes, I would have had a bet on him.

[menifee]

Thank you all for your good input. Like I said before, there's some smart people on this Board. Interesting opinions - thanks again.