Gulfstream, March 20, 2019....notes and possible plays

Race 1

Lucky Long looks to win 3 straight, and faces some tougher foes than she has met in those, in spite of seemingly dropping in class, when you strictly look at the amount of the purse.

She has been a steady, win in the right spot type her entire career, now 5 for 18, winning every 5 or 6 starts until she doubled up at this meet. In those 2 starts, she raced well and was full value, but also was the benefactor of very good trips. Last time, stalking a longshot in a loose pocket, angling out early and then just sitting outside that one, making the lead and hanging tough, while running a fast quarter around the turn to get some daylight. The start before that she stayed in all the way and shot up the rail when that opened, and again opened up and held firm. She is a trip horse, but takes advantage when she gets it. 

Being by Lookin at Lucky, many of his get seem to need that kind of trip and dont like roughing it, nor working hard in back to back starts.

Her last race has been her best speed figure to date, and without the soft trip and a duplicate of that type of speed, she is beatable, yet legit. 

Its tough to win 3 in a row period, let alone needing a soft trip and meeting some newer, tough customers who arent likely to let her fall into a comfortable lead without working for it. She is a bigger ML, but I expect her to be the chalk, lukewarm possibly, and I will play others.

Race 2

Stronger Kat is another going for 3 in a row, and she daylighted a suspect bunch last time with a final turn move that steamrolled anything that had any ideas of getting their picture taken.

She was 3-5 the best in both of those starts and left no doubt that was an accurate call by the bettors. 

This will be start 6 for the filly by a sire that never raced, and while she didn't do much at all in her first 3, she switched turf to dirt in start 4 and shortened up to todays distance, and repeated that exact formula last time as she moved from maiden claimer to claimer and now doubles her tag for this bunch.

She will meet this test with new connections, being claimed last time, but keeps the top jockey at the current meet. Her main foe comes out of a maiden claimer for this tag, and was a 4-5 winner in a short field. That one has woken up since Navarro claimed her and is on a roll. Speed wise they are virtually even. Others look legit. She is another I see getting beat if pressured, which is likely. 

Race 3

Seems to be a wide open affair with many having a decent shot if the trip goes their way. Pass for me.

Your best chance at getting value in this race appears to me to watch the post parade and the board and see if anything jumps out. 

Race 4

Gardencity Gambler is the obvious chalk here, shipping in from Maryland off a long layoff, daylighting a terrible bunch in a maiden claimer, but running basically the same speed that got her slaughtered back in Maryland. As such, she halves her price tag off the maiden win, and meets the bottom of the barrel here. She is beatable if you can find a live one from the balance.

Glutonosa upped her tag slightly last time off a 2nd place finish the time before, and was 4th. She shortens up a shade here on the move back down. She is dangerous enough with this mediocre to horrid bunch. If she happens to bring a price on the hammering of the expected chalk, she is value. Assuming she doesnt parade terrible. She broke her maiden at this distance in a maiden claimer, so she is level in that respect with the expected fave, and has a bit more experience than that one with winners, which can be an advantage. 

She comes back on 2 weeks this time, with a poor speed figure and last time she did that she was 3rd. She has to be seen in terms of what she might bring. 

I could see a long shot to a bomb in this race if something jumps out. Unrivaled Soul comes back on 7 days, after running horrible last week, but she seems to alternate good and bad efforts, and the one before was good, relative to this class. She is possible, but has to bring odds, I'd say 7-1 or higher.

Lisa Mila ran no good last time but managed 3rd, a month and a bit ago, beaten by Glutonasa for 2nd. She gets a monster trainer change to Barboza, but stays at the same level. Same owner as previous. Another that has to be seen.

Race 5

Violent Times kept good company in her brief career in New York, but returns here off a long layoff for the same connections, while finishing 2nd in that last start. She broke her maiden in a MSW in late 2017, her only start that year, followed 2 months later by a stakes try at this track just over a year ago where she was 8th. She tried another stakes race at Penn on the dirt, where she was 7th, and then 2nd twice on a shorter interval in New York, then shut down to end her 3yo year. She returns here with an outside post. Her sire only made 4 lifetime starts and many of his are seemingly brittle and lightly raced. She looks like a bad favorite to me. The long layoff off good form, combined with the long gaps in her career, and her sires short career would cause me concern if I were to back her at a short price first off that layoff. Behind her it could any of all of the rest, so its a good race to go deep and take a complete shot against Violent Times.

Race 6

Morocco is 1 for 20 lifetime, that win in 2017, and generally looks dangerous on the turn but hangs late, hence his record. I dont see the class drop being enough to get him over the top, and his speed numbers have been gradually declining. Mott is a great trainer, but he cant seem to get this one to go. 

Florida Cotton has one win and is now a 5yo, yet he has hit the board in 10 of 13 tries. He is Morocco with a shade more grit, but while he is gritty, he is a one speed kind who also drives hard off his front end and has suspect confirmation up front. He missed almost 7 months coming into his last start, a decent 2nd, but now comes back in 8 weeks, and returns in a claimer at the same level after being taken by Falcone,  off many 2nd place finishes. He has red flags all over and while he does have good speed numbers, he is not difficult to go against. He cuts back a furlong, but seems to run the same at any distance....good enough to earn, not good enough to win.

That leaves the rest, any of which will be a price and are viable if you get past the top 2.

Race 7

Sonoma Storm takes the price plunge from 35 to 16, after racing just 12 days ago. In that race, she ran out for a solid pocket position, stayed in and followed a bomb longshot who wired them, while they werent running that fast, she dropped the bit mid turn and backed away. I dont see the class drop as good enough. The distance appears to be her issue, and she runs the same distance as last time. Completely go against her.

Uncommon Factor has run 3 times at the meet and has yet to make the top 5, her speed numbers worse each time. She goes back to turf here, and gets blinkers and a slight price tag drop as Walder, a top trainer, seaches for an answer. That answer could be a trip to West Virginia in a 5k maiden claimer, but we shall see. She will have to do better, and her starting issues also dont help her cause. She did finish 2nd once in the summer, so she has some hope I guess.

Dillons Kitty is a one speed type, makes her 3rd lifetime start, back on grass again, goes longer, and shows some hope as she looks to find the right distance, surface and class. If the top 2 fail and they look like they can, she is a solid price option. She is another slicing her claiming tag. 

Rucia Mora has had some bad posts, and now gets a more favorable one, cuts back to the distance she started her career at, and gets a longshot jockey who is heady with this type. Another good price option with signs that make her viable.

Enoughandthensome keeps fiddling with the distance, had a troubled trip 2 back, a trainer who seems to right the ship when it looks like its going to the bottom of the ocean, takes a moderate class drop and goes 3rd start on the turf after only racing on dirt before that. Another with a shot at a price and with a jockey who can bring in a bomb on this kind.

Any of the others if they were to parade good and take unusual betting patterns are viable under those circumstances.

Race 8

Is a motley crew I will pass on. Hate them all equally.

Race 9

Wildwood Dancer is the obvious heavy chalk as he goes for 4 straight. He is a 9 time winner, 24 of 34 itm, and he comes to run every time. He is excitable and acts up going into and in the gate, and that will come back to bite him one of these times. Especially if he wants the lead and one of the longshots wants to hook him and take them both down the drain. This is a reasonably salty bunch and he is likely to get picked off by one or two of them in deep stretch.

Star Juancho, or Dupree, the stablemate of the chalk, look like the most likely suspects, but others can also trip out. If you go against the chalk, go fairly deep as this could be a shit show type of race. There are a lot of crafty jockeys in this race who know how to work the field and make a late move to get the money in this type of scenario.

Race 10

Wide open bunch in a big field. Post parade and odds board will give more clues and nobody is out of the mix in what could be a big price finale. Until they all are seen, its a fools game to sort this bunch on paper.

There's always a But: I don't make New Years Resolutions, but.....

When Dave Schwartz first interviewed me for his podcast, he asked me what he asks all his interview subjects. Are you a winning player? 

I answered yes, but with a caveat. 

Yes, overall, I am a winning player, and I laid out the reasons I think that is the case in the rest of the podcast, and in the 2nd one we did. But, the caveat was and still is, that I only win as long as I do the things I know I should do and that work. As soon as I deviate from that, I begin to lose. In many ways, that is different from many or the average player out there. They do what they think works, but it just doesn't. For me, what works works and all I really have to do is do those things and continue to generate newer and better ways to stay ahead of the pack, and then add those things and do them in addition to what already works. 

But like most people, and horseplayers, I have weaknesses. My worst one is that sometimes I think I can get away with not doing what I do---and do best, and just make bets because they look good at a glance. What I do best is watch replays, study horses for weaknesses and fatal flaws, assess odds to determine value, gather data and figure out probabilities. When I do all those things, overall, I win a lot more than I lose. So, why do I make the "stupid bets" the "bets I want to take back" the "bets I regret immediately and after the fact". 

Why do I do that?

Like many, I can be impulsive and lack some level of discipline. Over time, I've figured out that it boils down to just those two things. In every instance, I let up, fell back into the old bad habits that forced me to become a better player in the first place, and thought I could just "get away with it"....which I know, and you know, and we all know, you can't. It just doesn't work that way.

As I've transitioned into playing and watching only Thoroughbreds, which is completely a new thing for me (I will get into why that is in another blog down the road) I've been very mindful that its even more important not to make impulsive or badly disciplined bets that I know better than to make. So, since its been about 2 months now, and I've played slowly, carefully, and sparingly, and in relatively small amounts for what I normally do and will again, I was progressing well until a day about 3 weeks ago. 

Note that under the blue line, its just story to illustrate my main points in this blog, but you don't have to read that if you aren't interested in the story. You can skip over that part if you wish.

---------------------------------------------------------

It was a Tuesday. That much I remember. I had been doing well, getting almost all of them right, but with small 2 dollar bets, which is how I play when I'm "testing" something new. I know you need to play with real money even in the testing phase, to keep it real, but I don't want to lose too much in the process of sharpening up what I think I've learned and/or finding holes that I know will be there before I move back up to much bigger sums. Tuesday is a day that I wouldn't play much or at all with the T breds, as the tracks I follow....Gulfstream, Laurel, NYRA,  and Charlestown don't run that day. I think Mountaineer might have been running that night and I will play that track occasionally, I don't recall, but during the day, on Monday and Tuesdays, I use those days as prep for the days towards the weekend when all those tracks run at the same time. That is just too much work and prep to do all at once, so I spread the work out for those on the off days that are Monday and Tuesday for me, and partly on Wednesday, as there is no Laurel or Aqueduct on those days. 

On this afternoon, I was left with playing PARX and Mahoning Valley if I wanted to do more testing. I did. I didn't end up making any Mahoning bets, so it came down to PARX, which I really don't like playing for various reasons that I might touch on with another blog. Mainly, the morning line (ML) there is horrendous, the purses are grossly overinflated, and the cheating among trainers is over the top, even for an industry that has some of that at every track. In that respect though, PARX is the Al Capone of tracks compared to most which are the low level, street punk mafia types. But, I still wanted to test and make some plays, so PARX it was. 

I was out doing some errands, so I missed race 1. Race 2 was a small field which became much smaller. It started out as 7, then there were two scratches, who were 2 of the lower priced ML horses. That left 5 of them, of which 2 looked to have zero chance. That left 3 to choose from. I didn't like Miss Al Dila at all, who was the 2nd ML choice. She went off at a clear 3rd choice but was no good as I expected in the race. 

I watched the replay of the heavy favorite, Sheplaysthefield, who was dropping from NYRA into a soft spot at PARX, and she had okay form, although I didn't like how she ran and finished in her last start, which was now 10 weeks ago. Her trainer, Chris Englehart, a very high percentage guy, likes to use this angle, so, I expect that he will do it and I am mindful he can make it work at times. Still, I didn't like how she raced the time before, so, I would need odds to play her. She was likely to go off even money, which was her ML anyway, but early on, she was in the 1-5 range, and only drifted up towards the end of the cycle. The only other horse that looked viable to me was Queen Fantabulous, and in reality, she was the correct play if there was one in this race. She was 6-1 ML, but with one of the scratches being a lower ML than her, and the 2nd ML being a bad rating, I knew she was likely going to be in the 5-2 or 3-1 range. She had reasonable form and a legit shot, although the favorite clearly outclassed her on the program with recent efforts. I had these two horses to choose from if I was going to make the win bet. The rest didn't seem viable or playable. 

My normal discipline tells me to layoff a race like this. I don't like playing short priced faves who have iffy variables, and I don't play my 2nd choice unless I get my value price. Queen Fantabulous was in the 2-1 range, and that was too low. So, the right thing to do, was to make no play. The wrong thing to do, which is what I did, was bet the fave to win. She drifted up to even money, and that was okay value. I played her. As expected, from the get go, Sheplaysthefield ran poorly, was never involved or contentious, and even missed the board. On top of that, even money became 1-2 at the bell, and she was horrendous value. Queen Fantabulous won easy, and paid $6.70.

Clearly, a bad discipline play on my part, even though I had done my homework and wasn't impulsive. 

Next. 

Race 3 was a field of 8, but scratched down to 6, with an entry that made it 5 betting interests. Maiden claiming 2yo fillies, the toughest of the toughest to handicap as a rule. Especially at PARX. Nevertheless, I did the work, to see what shakes out. The longest shot I watched run at Belmont. My comment on her was..."never had any run" and I didn't see a drop to PARX as going to make any difference. Even at Charlestown, she might be 99-1. Nuff said. Toss. 

One of the scratches was the ML even money fave. So, the rest that are left were actually much longer shots relative to the entry when you remove the scratched fave. I looked at two others, and they looked, at best, to be hoping to beat half the entry for 3rd money. At best. That left the 6, Family Fortune, who had okay form on paper, but looked very suspect running her last race and in the post parade. I could see her being last, which she ended up close to being. 

That left the entry. Neither were spectacular, or even impressive, but they both had legit excuses and looked okay. I could see them running 1-2, but if not, 1-3 and one of them was going to pull through. However, the win price was 1-5, and could have ended up 1-9. No thanks for me on that front. At PARX, even in a 6 horse field with an entry, they will leave up show betting. The bridgejumpers jumped in, as you would expect, even though some of them got burned in the previous race, as I mentioned above when Sheplaysthefield missed the ticket. As they left the gate, the entry had 80 percent of the show pool, you got 2 for the price of one, they had a high percentage trainer and solid jockeys, and both had better form than the entire balance of the mediocre field. So, I wanted to get my $2 back with this bet, and I played $50 to show on the entry. I think it was a valid bet in terms of weighting with my $2 bets otherwise. 

The entry ran 1-3, with the winner an eased up 3 length winner, and the 3rd place horse 22 lengths in front of the 4th horse. It was never in doubt. It was about as good a percentage play as you can find. I don't play on the bridgejumper side often, but there are times when its a good play, and this was one of those. 

Before I move to the last example of that day, lets look at what I've done. I made a bad discipline play on Race 2, and lost $2. I made a very good, high percentage, well researched and thought out play in Race 3, and made $2.50. An overall return of 12 percent profit on the two bets. But, it should have a net profit of $2.50 and not .50, because I hurt myself by making a bad discipline bet in Race 2. That is the valuable part of all of it. Not the money. The lesson. Don't hurt yourself. There are enough ways to lose on your own without doing that. 

I had a few things to do, so I skipped races 4 and 5, as they didn't look like races where I wanted to make a call at this point in my development. The night before, I had looked over the entire PARX card, at a quick glance of each race, which is always what I do when I prep, in terms of thinking of where I want to end up putting my energy. I noticed race 6 right away, as it seemed like a horseman's freebie. For those who don't know what that is, for whatever reason, they sometimes write races where a very successful and dominant horse can actually drop severely in class without going in for a claiming tag, and take a stroll around the track for 1st money. On paper, this looked like a race like that. The horse in question is called Ruby Bleu, a 3yo gelding who had just won a 47k purse at PARX 7 days earlier, and had won today's condition, a 32k starter allowance about a month before. 

He also was a very high percentage winner, and top 3 finisher. On paper, he looked bulletproof with this bunch. However, paper doesn't win races, horses who can reproduce their form...and thus, performance, win races. I thought originally he would be 1-9 when I breezed over the race the night before, and thus, I didn't even bother to handicap the race, or even watch Ruby Bleu's replays. That would come back to bite me, as when I came back inside and the race was 0 mtp, he was 3-5 instead of 1-9, and looked like a good play. But how would I really know that, unless I verified that the horse on the program was the horse that was running this day? I wouldn't. I didn't watch him in the walking ring, or post parade, or even race last time or the time before. He could be a 3 legged cripple, or very sore, or tired, or a bad actor. As it turns out, he never ran a step, and was running in horrible the entire way, and was well up the track. On the impulse of seeing his price and thinking he was good value, I made a quick decision to bet him in spite of not doing the work, doing what I need to do to win, as I mentioned to Dave in the podcast. So, my small profit on the first 2 bets was now a loss. 

If I had a do over, I skip the first bet, make the second one, and then do my homework and either skip the 3rd one or play something else that was of value in that race. I lost because I didn't do what I was supposed to do to win. 

----------------------------------------------------

Its now over 3 weeks later. I don't make New Years Resolutions, but I am making one this year. 

No impulsive or bad discipline bets of any kind. 

How do I plan to live up to that resolution?

By being resolute, and by having a simple 5 second strategy of a few questions I ask myself before I confirm any bet I make. Those are:

"Is this a stupid bet" 

"If I make this bet, will I want to take it back after the fact" 

"will I regret this bet, win or lose".  

"will I regret not making this bet, win or lose".   

"have I done the work I need to do to make this bet with confidence"

"have I used my skill set to the best of my ability to determine value"

These are questions you should ask yourself every time you make a bet if you are a serious player with the intention of winning, not just playing. 

A resolution should be something where you can control the outcome. I can fully control whether or not I make disciplined and impulsive bets.

The thing about resolutions is that you need to be resolute. Or don't make them. Or make them but know you will fail because you really aren't resolute.

Resolutions aren't wishes. They are promises you make to yourself based on realistic goals and determined behaviors you deem necessary for you to succeed at whatever you choose to try and succeed at. 

Will I slip up once or twice? Maybe. Once or twice over an entire year when I make 10,000 bets is okay, as they are not going to effect my overall results in any way. But slipping up on say 1 out of 5 bets on average is the difference between profit and loss. I don't aim to lose, so, I can't slip up at the rate I have been over the years. That is one of the things I figured out when I realized why I used to lose when I should have been winning.

I will have that voice in my head, over my shoulder, that should be there, to guide me and mentor me. If it's there, I will tow the line and stick to the resolution. 

I'm not big on having regrets. As a rule, regret is a negative thing to have, and its backward looking. 

Regret is usually a bad thing, especially if its a regret from a past mistake. But, regret can be a good thing if you use it as a guide towards your future, and what hasn't happened yet. Like a resolution, you can control your intentions to avoid future regret. As a motivator and guide to think about your current actions in terms how you will likely view them after the fact, win or lose. 

To be a winning player, you have to have your personal variables in line. Even the smartest, experienced and talented players are very capable of shooting themselves in the head with bad bets that they regret making because they weren't resolute in doing what they do best. I am one of those. I hope at years end to say I was one of those. If so, I can possibly move on to a new resolution, like solving world peace. We shall see.