December 2009

Sun	Mon	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri	Sat
		1	2	3	4	5
6	7	8	9	10	11	12
13	14	15	16	17	18	19
20	21	22	23	24	25	26
27	28	29	30	31

Cinchy Saturday?

Lucky's Race & Sports Book, which has eight locations in Nevada, has posted an interesting prop on today's two heavy odds-on propositions:

2/7 ($2.57 for $2 to us parimutuel types) that Rachel Alexandra wins the Mother Goose AND Zenyatta wins the Vanity;

3/2 ($5.00 for $2) that one of them wins and one of them loses;

12/1 ($26.00 for $2) that they both lose.

On paper both races are mismatches that would have both of them going off at 1-5 even without the additional fan-club action from casual fans and souvenir-ticket buyers. Even the most stubborn contrarians would have trouble making rational cases against either one.

In theory, Zenyatta has a bigger hurdle, because the handicap conditions of the Vanity have her conceding from 13 to 18 pounds to her opponents, while all Mother Goose entrants carry 121. If either is the slightest bit vulnerable, however, it might be Rachel Alexandra on grounds of how the race might be run. The two other fillies with early speed, Malibu Prayer and Flashing, are drawn to her outside, at least raising the possibility of her getting embroiled in some sort of an early tussle.

[Update 12:35 pm:] Hopeful Image and Don't Forget Gil are late scratches from the Mother Goose, leaving a three-horse field.

The Mother Goose is scheduled for 5:12 pm Eastern time as the 9th at Belmont, and the Vanity will go 18 minutes later at 5:30 pm ET as the 4th at Hollywood.

--It's sunny and in the 70's in New York today, with only a 30 percent chance of isolated thunderstorms before evening, making it so far the nicest day here since the Belmont Stakes three weeks ago. (The 5th and 6th races have been taken off the grass; the 7th, 8th and 10th, the races surrounding the Mother Goose in the $350k guaranteed late Pick-4, remain on turf.)

Friday's last race at Belmont on a twilight card had to be cancelled after a ferocious storm hit the track while the horses were in the paddock for the finale.

The cancellation made the pick-4 and pick-6 pay out with an "all" in the final leg to the tune of $164 for $2 in the pick-4 and $12,926 in the pick-6. There had been one Pick-6 combo alive to each of four horses in the 9th, two of them apparently in Canadian currency. Here were the will-pays if the 9th had been run:

--Serious question: Why was Sovereign Fund 6-1 instead of 20-1 in Friday night's fifth race at Hollywood?

Sovereign Fund, a 3-year-old Giant's Causeway colt and half-brother to Marsh Side, raced twice last fall in New York for trainer Barclay Tagg, finishing a distant 7th and a distant 10th without encountering any trouble or displaying any ability. He showed up Friday night off an eight-month layoff, now in Neil Drysdale's care, as a twice-thrashed maiden facing multiple winners in a N1x allowance race. His pp's showed two Beyers of 60 and 52 in a race where the top contenders routinely earn figures in the mid-to-high 80's.

When I saw he was the third choice at 4-1 on the morning line, I honestly thought it was a typographical error. How could a horse beaten 10 1/2 lengths at 13-1 in a maiden race eight months ago be 4-1 in an allowance race in his next start? But the Hollywood linemaker clearly knows his customers better than I do: Sovereign Fund was 4-1 or 5-1 through most of the betting before drifting late. He finished sixth, beaten 10 lengths while beating one horse.

It's not as if I had a good opinion on the race myself: I took a shine to a 13-1 shot from low-percentage connections who finished only a head in front of Sovereign Fund. But I remain baffled and curious: Was this serious betting action on a horse surrounded by whispers and high expectations, or just proof that bettors won't let anything ridden by Garrett Gomez, champion or chihuahua, go off at more than 6-1?

Posted by Steven Crist Jun 27, 2009 12:31:39 PM | Permalink

Keywords:

Comments

gk_in_wisc says:

Just a reminder to all- one more week until July 29 and opening at Saratoga. And one week until Hattie's chicken! What a great time and the horses will be coming- see opening day has 5 turf races ... and only one sprint- a stakes race. Won't be long.

Posted by gk_in_wisc Jul 21, 2009 9:37:12 AM

chuck_berger says:

While I am not singling out anyone in particular, I feel that when a trainer is a repeat offender he should be ruled off for life.
How can the betting public take into their calculations who is "juiced" in a race he is betting?
As an owner back in New Mexico years ago, my horse was second in the Texas Derby by a horse who was on a strong drug. The winner died the next day.
How can the betting public compete or get a fair shake if certain trainers are using illegal performance enhancers?
Racing commissions need to protect the public as well as owners and trainers who run their horses clean.
If trainers cheat bar them for life.
Tell me what purpose it serves to allow these low lifes to make a living by cheating the public and other honest horsemen?

Posted by Chuck Berger Jul 20, 2009 11:34:31 PM

mlnj says:

bochalls:

You must have been standing on line near me with the minutes ticking away one day! (I frequently advocate the 30 second trap door when some guy is taking two minutes or more.) Either that or great minds think alike.

And BTW, I usually use the machines and purposly look for folks with small balances. It sort of limits how many bets they can make.

Posted by ml/nj Jun 29, 2009 7:46:35 PM

gk_in_wisc says:

Steve - was at arlington park yesterday and thought of last yr and really enjoying your visit and handicapping info last year. Are you coming back to the midwest this summer??? Hope you can come back this year. I love all the polytrack- "crap"- talk and agree with most of it- BUT when the nearest race track is poly and as beautiful as ARLINGTON - what can you say ... stay home or go and enjoy the great horses... there is NO question.
Bill Finley was there yesterday and he has his Synthetic book and claims... number 1- NO racing exec ANYWHERE will consider synthetic at ANYTIME now, since the santa anita mess and the cushion track fiasco! Too expensive and questionable. That was interesting and number 2- he claims 90-95 % FROM his limited reseach (3-4 years of data) 90% will run to form! There are exceptions BUT racing is racing and the horses will perform. He did make one last point- whoever "figures" poly out will be the one making the money in the next few years as "Beyer" did and "Crist" did per pick six thinking- all those things that now others are using because great handicappers or bettors have shared their info!! He is right - if you play it - and I do not play it much- I know !! some of you will never bet a dime there! BUT the pay offs are amazing! He is right - if you play and can handicap it you are rewarded WELL. Come on back to the most beautiful racecourse- that just happens to have POLY crap.
)oh by the way - called NYRA today and Saratoga tickets were mailed last week and YES I got them... engishchannel hang in there yours may be on the way!!) The blog is great!

Posted by gk_in wisc Jun 29, 2009 2:23:11 PM

george_quinn says:

Forget Zenyatta
The fact that they are aiming for the Clement Hirsch in early August tells all of us they have no plans on venturing off of plastic. I would also be very shocked to see her run in the classic. They have spoon fed her to this point what is to keep them from two more and then breed her undeafeated? I just know she ain't leaving Cali.
George in Tampa

Posted by george quinn Jun 29, 2009 1:30:32 PM

john_c says:

Nothing wrong with a match race between Zenyatta and Rachel except that Zenyatta would be at a disadvantage due to her lack of early speed.
In fact, due to the lack of traffic, I'd predict that match races pose far LESS danger to both horses and riders; I don't have 100 years of race data to confirm that prediction but the hypothesis is, at least, logical.

I am sick of people using Ruffian as the defining example of the danger of match-races! Ruffian is my favorite filly of all time but what happened to her during that infamous race was a FREAK accident, an anomaly that had NOTHING to do with the fact that she had only one (male) competitor. (You might even speculate that the nearby swooping seagull spooked Ruffian causing her to take a bad step.)
While I'm at it, those who didn't want Rachel in the Preakness or Belmont for fear of another "Eight Belles incident" do NOT understand the unbelievable rarity of that beautiful filly's (EB's) particular injury. Even more ironically, she broke down AFTER the race was over, when the pressure/competition had diminished.
In short, don't base your standards upon anomalous, unusual, yet tragic incidents. Appreciate the enormity of these sad past events but expect that the same outcome will ALMOST NEVER occur again, given the same circumstances; sadly, horses break down almost every day for PREDICTABLE reasons- that is something that we should be focusing on in order to minimize (impossible to eliminate, sadly) these brutal losses.
Race fans should actually be clamoring for MORE match races every year; oh, the media would just eat that up, playing non-stop the Ruffian-Foolish Pleasure race with absolutely NO historical or statistical context.

Posted by John C. Jun 29, 2009 1:22:25 PM

prozacjack says:

Dear Steve, And fellow players. You should KNOW what you are going to do, and your HOMEWORK should be all but DONE before you get to the track. Forget about the last MINUTE "smart money" I don't want some OLD rich DRUNK that STAGGERS to the window and bets a bundle to influence my bets, and either should anyone else. Hell I've personally placed bets for my RICH drunk friend, this is a guy that changes a TOTE board at most tracks. Learn to make your OWN decisions and stick by them. Anyone interested in a COLORFUL Old mutual ticket from 1978 I would be glad to send you one, those were the good old days, when all it took is one quick glance to check out your ticket. Today the tickets are as exciting as a grocery receipt...LOL

Posted by prozacjack Jun 29, 2009 12:18:41 PM

dan_baedeker says:

Are the Saturday Beyers on Rachel and Zenyatta in yet? Rachel was certainly the more visually impressive of the two. And what are the highest Beyers for each of them?

Posted by Dan Baedeker Jun 29, 2009 11:41:16 AM

john_n says:

ml/nj,

I agree with you. My post didn't describe the old-style mutuels properly. There were many good things about them, and I enjoyed the aesthetics of the old tickets and the direct, swift manner in which the tellers would punch them out. The different colors for each denomination, the more substantial light-cardboard composition of the tickets, and the smaller size of exacta tickets are all factors that lent character to the mutuel betting process. I should have included some statements like that in my post.

That is a great idea of yours for tracks to create express lines for single ticket bettors. Maybe that is something we can push for on this blog and get some tracks to try it. Even if the express lines accomodated WPS and exacta wagering only, it would be an improvement, and would keep us from getting stuck behind people placing trifecta, superfecta, 10-cent superfecta, pick-3, pick-4, and pick-6 wagers. It seems to me that express windows would probably increase the handle as well as the convenience at tracks, especially on big days.

Best regards,

Posted by John N. Jun 29, 2009 11:29:34 AM

bochalls says:

Tracks need to install $25 or $50 minimum betting machines, just like the $50 min window. The machine will not accept a winning ticket or voucher under $50. This will keep that genius who has a $3 voucher from exploring EVERY way possible to bet it (they usually settle for a few $1 show bets on 9-5 horses). This 'exploration' can sometimes take up to 5mins as he will cancel and reenter his selection numerous times. It is akin to the 'handicapping at the window' guy we are all familiar with. How about the 'odds checker' at the window; guy who keeps looking over his shoulder at the monitors to check that last flash of the tote! When you get to the window the teller should cut you off after a pregnant pause of indecisiveness(lets say 15 seconds of silence or 'uhhhh')...you obviuosly don't have a clue how to bet your cash so you should just keep it. Either that or you just drop through a trap door in the floor, Monty Burns style...they could also release the hounds on you! Believe me ya'll, the recetrack strangler is coming to a betting wiindow near you...soon.

Posted by bochalls Jun 29, 2009 10:05:26 AM

bbranch says:

Steve, I believe you've pointed out on more than one occasion that HOL (or CA tracks) run a feature race early, leaving it out of P6 or late P4 wagers, their reason being exposure to or for the benefit of the earlier time zones...then they run the G1 Vanity as Race 4 on Saturday and the G2 Beverly Hills late on Sunday...has anyone @ HOL ever offered an official explanation as to why they do what they do....if I were HOL, I'd try to be consistent and please their fans in CA...there are a lot more of them than I see in attendance @ KD.

Posted by BBranch Jun 29, 2009 2:01:14 AM

mlnj says:

While john_n portrays the old betting machines as if they were difficult for bettors, it should be remembered that when the MTP signs flashed to zero at the Big A and there truly were only 60 seconds left until the machines locked, if you were tenth on line you still got down. The tellers normally only heard either one or three words from each person on line: "three" or "three four times." Now you can almost die behind some of the folks making their bets. I wish the tracks would have express lines for single ticket bettors (like me, most of the time).

Posted by ml/nj Jun 28, 2009 9:52:54 PM

rawlawltd says:

Ken says & Bill M says:

I also am confused by the disqualification in the 10th Saturday. I have said before in this space that I would prefer no dQ's, at any time. Administer justice to the offending jock later. Do not cause pain to the betting public. What bothers me the most is that there really aren't any rules. Every decision is ad hoc. Durkin said the DQ was because the other horse "lost momentum". Hell, that happens 50 times in every race. My understanding was that the leader in a race had the right to any part of the track that they wanted, as long as no contact is made. It varies with every decision. Am I biased in this case?? Yeh, I would have won the NHC qualifier rather easily had the horse stayed up. Luckily, it didn't cost me a trip to the finals in Vegas. Just agita and a load of NHC Tour points.

Posted by rawlawltd Jun 28, 2009 8:23:12 PM

yuwipi says:

I made it a point to watch the 30 minute NYRA coverage of the Mother Goose on MSG. Thought they did an excellent job. Andy Serling was particularly good, offering historical info and analysis. The show did whet my appetite for their scheduled coverage during the Saratoga meet. I'm hoping they go forward right through the fall Belmont meet with the programs. Did miss Jan Rushton a little though.

Steve,

While reading your column regarding the Zenyatta/Rachel Alexandra situation on Thursday night I was flabbergasted when you wrote that as recently as this spring members of the Board of Directors at Breeders Cup proposed to permanently locate the races at a synthetic site. After a few days to calm down and try to find out what I could about how BC operates I'm thankful for your sources. It's totally understandable, but unfortunate, that the names of those making such a proposal can't be made public. The BC site offers the results of a questionnaire sent to 5,500 or so foal and stallion nominators who pay the freight to fund the operation. They received about 280 responses. Not exactly an indication of a healthy functioning exchange of ideas and opinions. For what can been observed of the Breeders Cup organization by a lay person it shows all the signs of an apparatus that has been hijacked by vested interests. What a mess.

Posted by yuwipi Jun 28, 2009 8:03:05 PM

unitas says:

i'm in Mark C, Shuffle up & Deal...I am actually considering turning my back on this game for good, and I have been a racing fan since grammer school, and family members of mine own race horses...very sad indeed...

Posted by Unitas Jun 28, 2009 7:28:55 PM

walt says:

Spectacularbid:

If I were at Delaware Park, I would be on the phone to the connections of both Rachel Alexandra and Zenyatta right now, offering to triple the purse of the Delaware Handicap (Grade 2) on July 19 at Delaware Park to $3 million to get both of them there. That also would assure a full field since third money in a $3,000,000 race would be $300,000+, equal to winning a $500,000 race and if either of the big two falter getting a much bigger payday.

Posted by Walt Jun 28, 2009 4:52:30 PM

john_n says:

Steve,

For some nostalgia, would you be able to show some pictures of old-style mutuel machines and tickets, along with an explanation of the markings that were on the tickets? It might be interesting for modern players to see what we had to endure before the modern style mutuel machines were introduced in the mid-1970's. The old-style rotary-punch, one-ticket-at-a-time machines were in use at all the major US tracks. One type of machine was used for WPS wagers, while different machines were required for both exacta and trifecta wagers. Horseplayers had to stand in 2 or 3 separate lines if they wanted to bet both WPS and one or more exotics. A player wanting to bet $40 to win on horse number 5, and a $20 exacta on the 5-1 combination, would first stand in line at the $10 WPS window, and say to the teller something like "5 to win four times," or perhaps more commonly, "Gimme the 5-horse four times." He would then stand in the line for the $10 Exacta window, and say "Gimme the 5-1 twice." Denominations of the WPS ticket windows would be $2, $5, $10, $50, and $100 at the larger tracks, and maybe only up to $50 at the mid-size and small tracks. And there were separate banks of windows for selling and cashing tickets. In those days, the most common reason to get shut out of a wager was simply the number of people in front of you trying to bet, whereas today the most common reason for getting shut out is delays from players who don't understand the best way to ask for multiple wagers. Anyway, I just thought it might be of interest for people to see or remember the old-style parimutuels.

Best regards,

Posted by John N. Jun 28, 2009 4:08:17 PM

paul says:

I am amazed everytime I hear Curlin ran a poor race in the BC. NOPE. He ran his race. His time was around the 2 minutes, the same as he ususally runs for a mile-and-a-quarter. That puts him with the all time greats. Raven's Pass ran a sub-2 minute. When I handicapped the race, I said, who can run a sub-2 minute? I figured the Euros could by drafting, which they did, so I won. I was proud of Curlin's performance even though I bet against him. He ran a quality race. Jess Jackson should not insult his horse. Curlin is GOOD on poly, just not GREAT on it.

Posted by Paul Jun 28, 2009 4:02:32 PM

ken says:

Was that dq in the 10th saturday justified? Seemed kinda soft to me.

Posted by ken Jun 28, 2009 3:22:09 PM

bksacks says:

People need to update their preconceptions. Neil Drysdale horses are no longer given extra consideration out west, particularly if the field includes other top turf trainers (Frankel, Canani, Sadler, couple of others). Gomez, it's true, draws action, but you can find other Drysdale maidens entered against winners in the past couple of years who fared similarly poorly, and who wer not bet off the board. I specifically remember him entering a female maiden against male winners. Have no idea why.

Posted by bksacks Jun 28, 2009 2:10:09 PM

barry says:

Anything but a match race between RA and Zenyatta : The last thing this sport needs right now is a Ruffian moment.

Posted by Barry Jun 28, 2009 12:36:59 PM

bill_m says:

Did anyone get a good view of the DQ in the 10th yesterday? I only saw the head on once and was unsure if it was warranted. Obviously this is coming from someone who would have liked no action be taken. I realize that the Tagg horse was much the best but Dominguez has a habit of putting his turf mounts in tough spots. It isn't Garcia's job to give up the rail to allow him through. Thanks for any comments.

Posted by Bill_M Jun 28, 2009 11:53:19 AM

ken_s says:

Thoroughbred vs. Harness Racing.

On Saturday, the thoroughbreds two marquee "races" were a three horse field in the once prestigous Mother Goose which resulted in a $2.10 win mutuel.

At Hollywood, the other showcase "race" was Zenyatta crushing glorified claimers. Zenyatta payed a whopping $2.60 to win.

On the other hand, Harness Racings fillies were going for $600,000 at Mohawk with a full, competitive field of 10.

Instead of the "Sport of Kings', thoroughbred racing should now be known as the
"Sport of the Bridgejumpers".

Posted by Ken S. Jun 28, 2009 11:31:45 AM

stable_girl says:

Steve,
So I'm curious. Why do they run Rachel with a neckstrap? It's not as if Boo Boo is gonna need to pull leather. Is it a good luck charm or something?

Posted by Stable Girl Jun 28, 2009 9:30:55 AM

ponyman says:

Love cocky move by Calvin BO-RAIL to show off Rachel Alexander by splitting those two other horses. He was just having some fun. Keeps this sport exciting- There is nothing else to compete with horseracing. Good luck to all today.

Posted by ponyman Jun 28, 2009 8:20:43 AM

grasslover says:

Steve- I found (via the official charts) some startling similarities between Rachel's Mother Goose and Count Fleet's Belmont:

1. Both horses faced only 2 rivals.

2. Both horses paid $2.10 to win.

3. Both horses created very similar minus win pools (Nearly $19,000 for Rachel and nearly $16,000 for the Count).

Rachel's 2 opponents went off at 6-1 and 11-1, while Count Fleet's opponents went off at 28-1 and 52-1. Did the different win pool takeouts of the respective times make THAT much difference in the odds of the other 2 horses in those races? Just wondering. Thanks. My two cents.

Posted by grasslover Jun 28, 2009 8:20:42 AM

spectacularbid says:

rachel alexandra and zenyatta may be the two best race horses in america. it is unusual in this country for a female horse to be best but it is extraordinary that the top two would be female. it would be a shame if a race is not written that would attract both of them.

Posted by spectacularbid Jun 28, 2009 1:09:50 AM

cigarvacation says:

Steve-
Just read your article from thursday. I'm with Jess Jackson on his take of synthetic racing. I do still believe Curlin would not have won the BC last year if it were at CD or BEL but I feel he might have fared better than he did at SA. I think it is an atrocity that horse racing has their championship day (or now days) racing on synthetic. While it is still to early to determine the pros and cons of the surface, BC events should be held at real dirt tracks. It is a shame that Curlin (who in many peoples opinions was the best horse in the last decade) had to race his final race on that nonsense. A bigger shame would be if RA and Zenyatta DO meet in this years BC at SA.(A built in excuse for either camp that ends up on the wrong end) Personally, from a visual perspective, Zenyatta's best race was the Apple Blossom at OP. She just seems like such a plodder on those tracks out west (as opposed to the jet I saw at OP last year) and I feel we, the fans, are not seeing her at her best. Baffert said it best when he stated that synthetics make great horses look average and average horses look great. Finally, I don't know about the rest of you but I detest match races. I would love to see these two hook up (on a real dirt track) with at least 6 or 7 other horses in the starting gate even if those mares are 3k claimers from Penn National.

Posted by cigarvacation Jun 27, 2009 11:41:23 PM

don_reed says:

Great crowd today at Belmont (stunned to hear & appreciated the informed & intelligent remarks from an employee of, of all places, ESPN).

The applause for Rachel in the paddock prior to the Mother Goose was music. When she heard it, she knew what it meant, & waved her head & pranced in appreciation.

Witnessed something I've never seen, although I'm sure it happens. The entire 3rd floor ticket office staff came out of their office & were sitting in the seats behind us, rooting Rachel on.

Zenyatta's triumph had @ fifty people in front of the TV screen, cheering & applauding.

Incredible. The country's owners spent, what, @ $250 million on the current crop of race horses - & at the half-way point of 2009, only TWO of them are bona fide box office attractions.

The energy persisted. I've never heard such vociferous yelling & cheering at the conclusion of a 10th race in Elmont (the loudest were probably the fans who, sadly. had the 9-1 winner - DQ'ed).

Towering, majestic clouds, the remnants of June's permanent storm, ringed the track. On this afternoon, they held Belmont races on an island in the South Pacific.

Can't have everything. Mark C, I agree. It was, with the exception of the Mother Goose, a notably dismal card for a NYRA Saturday afternoon.

Had the 8th race not been run, it would have been a chalk snooze. Had the 9th race not existed, there would have been no reason to get up & go - none. But I'll pass on the poker offer. See if Jennifer Tilly needs a fourth!

Posted by Don Reed Jun 27, 2009 10:26:29 PM

george_quinn says:

Hey Steve,
I see where Shane Sellers is coming back to ride again.
I did not like him or Pulpit.
Did not use them in the Derby and won't use them in the 6th race at Evangeline either.
George in Tampa

Posted by george Quinn Jun 27, 2009 10:14:37 PM

dan_c says:

Let's see Saratoga mid summer match race on DIRT!!!!

Rachel vs Zenyatta

But Z wouldnt come cause they want some fillies added for speed etc etc so let each owner enter 1 more filly or horse doesnt matter, let Dutrow enter Seattle smooth and the Darley people come with their 3 filly entry and we got us a $1 million dollar race. Seems too logical!!!

Or Move the Breeders Cup to DIRT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by dan c Jun 27, 2009 7:34:43 PM

mike says:

I agree with prozacjack, that race isn't the only example. I beleive folks at Hollywood bet the jocks/trainers without much consideration for the horse itself. It does have it's advantages though as horses who are well meant, but trained and ridden by lesser lights tend to pay more than they should. Mike

Posted by Mike Jun 27, 2009 7:29:47 PM

mark_c says:

Is it just me? or is the belmont card today a lot of garbage from a betting standpoint? maybe I just hate NYRA so much that I have become jaded...poker anyone???

Posted by mark C Jun 27, 2009 3:08:29 PM

ejs says:

There's many ingredients that go into a parimutual stew, but, without having seen the PPs, I would submit that a partial explanation would be 'self-fulling prophecy.'

Morning odds effect how people wager. Had this horse been 15-1 in the program it probably would have gone off much longer. But the 4-1 gets people thinking, at least subliminally, "maybe the odds maker knows something I don't." Combine this with Gomez/Drysdale, the transfer of connections, the ship west, the unusual distance and a small field and you get 6.50-1.

Posted by ejs Jun 27, 2009 2:45:11 PM

george_quinn says:

Garret Gomez would be 10-1 without a horse under him. He is not my cup of tea. I prefer under the radar runners like Miguel Mena and Chris Decarlo but to each his own. I think jockeys get to much credit anyway. How can anyone say Edgar Prado is better or worse than Julien Leparoux? Or in a lesser earning category how can you say Corie Lanerie is any better or worse then Jamie Theriot? Put Garret Gomez on a $1500 dollar claimer Tuesday night at Penn National at 20-1 and lets see what he does.

Love your blogs Steve,
George in Tampa

Posted by george Quinn Jun 27, 2009 1:55:07 PM

dutch says:

I am not a big believer that differences in weight carried makes a that much of a difference (though 18 pounds may), but I would like to see handicap conditions done away with for graded stakes.

If these are the best races for the best horses, they shouldn't need weight allowances.

Posted by Dutch Jun 27, 2009 1:49:08 PM

madum says:

Steve, regarding Sovereign Fund: In a previous race that very night, a horse called Cat Calloway with similar horrendous stats (trailing throughout, 10 lenghts behind, at 80 to 1, under good rider Tyler Baze, only three weeks ago) was ridden by Gomez. I disregarded that horse entirely based on his PPs thinking that Gomez' agent had made a mistake, or something... To my surprise Cat Calloway showed vast improvement, closing fast to finish 3rd, after a slow start and a wide turn, showing a lot more than what his PPs suggested.

I know you will disagree with my next statement, but after that I reminded myself to always give some credit to Gomez' agent's opinion/info.

Posted by MAdum Jun 27, 2009 1:33:11 PM

jackson says:

Hi Steve,

Loved the info on last Fridays Hollywood pick six carryover. I was wondering how you obtained the information you provided on the tickets alive going into the last race. Did you figure it out based on will pays and pool total or did the information come from Hollywood and is available to the public.

[From the willpays -- SC.]

Posted by jackson Jun 27, 2009 1:11:09 PM

ray_flack says:

Steve, I'm with you on the unusual odds, morning line and final, on the horse in question in the 5th at HOL on 6-26. Someone must have spread rumors or the line maker missed something. The race was 1 1/4 mile on turf and was run in 2:00 and small change. The exotics were in line with more solid thinking and handicapping with the even-money favorite running third.

Posted by ray flack Jun 27, 2009 1:09:28 PM

gary_c says:

Any update on the NYRA NAssau OTB feud that is penalizing the public?

Posted by Gary C Jun 27, 2009 1:08:08 PM

prozacjack says:

Steve, why don't I proof read??? I meant you will always get REDUCED odds on Gomez and ANYTHING trained by Neil Drysdale.......

Posted by prozacjack Jun 27, 2009 12:53:59 PM

prozacjack says:

Dear Steve,The answer to your question regarding Sovereign Fund is the FACT Hollywood Park on a Friday night attracts a far LESS sophisticated crowd than you'll EVER see at Santa Anita, and when you COMBINE Gomez and Neil Drysdale (on the grass)a horse can come out in a "wheel Chair" and you'll a lot at HOLLYWEIRD Park....

Posted by prozacjack Jun 27, 2009 12:48:45 PM

Comments to this entry are closed.

About

Steven Crist has been the Publisher and a columnist for Daily Racing Form since 1998. Previously, he covered racing for The New York Times from 1981-1990; was founding editor-in-chief of The Racing Times in 1991-92; and a vice-president of the New York Racing Association from 1994-97. He recently released an instructional DVD titled "Exotic Tickets," and is the author of several books including "Betting on Myself" and "Exotic Betting."

December 2009

Archives

Cinchy Saturday?

Comments

About

Recent Posts

Recent Comments