OCTAVE-the-RAVE

With the explosion of new venues and expanded racing dates in recent years, fully 75 percent of all racing nationwide these days is in the claiming ranks.  As a result, being aware of the various nuances v. the claiming ranks is more important today than ever.

Rather than discuss those various nuances, I thought this an excellent opportunity to delve into the acumen of our self-styled young Masters -- Brandon, Michael, and Robert - our Pubic Handicappers extraordinaire.

Cowboy up, gentlemen, si voux plait.  Please tell us what you routinely do with the following type horses, and why.  The "why," of course, is the key, and as well simple, cut, and dry.  You should be able to share this "why" ... your deductive reasoning based on your vast experience ... in a few brief sentences.

1)  Subject horse is making his 3^rd lifetime start.  His first two starts were at the bottom of the claiming ladder ... say $12,500 at Fair Grounds.  In February - his debut -- he got some play at the windows, going off 12-1 in a field of 12, ran 8^th by 11 lengths, w/ a BSF of 42.  In early March, he ran 2^nd beaten 3 lengths at the same level at 42-1, with a BSF of 55.  Today, he moves up to the $20,000 maiden claiming level.  His trainer has started a total of 54 horses for the year, and has a winning percentage of nine percent.

2)  Same horse, same running lines, only this time the horse debuted in January, came back two weeks later in early February, and moves-up today off a 6-week break for a trainer who has started 694 horses YTD, with a winning percentage of 19 percent.

For the sake of this discussion, there are no significant changes coming into this 3^rd lifetime effort.  Same jockeys; no equipment changes; no "nut" jobs; routine workout pattern; etc. 

What can you share with us about these two scenarios based solely on the information provided?

Rave

"Sierra Sunset got a Beyer Speed Figure of 99. Liberty Bull got a 95, Big Truck a 93, and Georgie Boy a 92."

************************************************************

I continue to be astonished by the Beyer Speed Figures.  The longer I study them, the more convinced I become they are without substance, and may be the biggest con-job ever foisted on the thoroughbred racing industry.  The bolded above is just the latest example.

As much as I harangue Left Coast racing as the sport's most overrated - which it consistently proves to be year after year - by far the most impressive performance over the past weekend was that of Georgie Boy.  Here is the chart recap of his run:

"Georgie Boy pulled his way into stalking position, remained off the rail, awaited room entering the stretch, shifted out when roused, drifted inward under right hand urging, steered back out again in deep stretch, then surged outside and past the leader."

For starters, young, inexperienced horses going around two turns for the first time typically DO NOT display this kind of versatility.  Typically, they cave-in like cheap tents when things don't go just right, as War Rat did when encountering misadventure in the TB Derby for the first time in his 2-turn race career. 

More to the point, this is precisely the kind of performance that screams CLASSIC potential: pulled his way into contention (on the bridle from the start); remained off the rail (he was 3-4 wide most of the race); awaited room (professionalism); shifted out (versatility); drifted inward (to be expected in 1^st 2-turn effort); steered back out again (unrelenting determination); and surged to victory (still had plenty left in the tank despite the misadventures).

But wait ‘til you hear the punch line: G-Boy did all this in the stretch on his wrong lead!  Georgie Boy never changed leads in the stretch - also not surprising for a horse going 2-turns for the first time -- which means he did all this shifting, steering, and surging-to-win on his weak, tired side! 

Holy s**t!

Visually, it was as impressive a Derby prep as I've seen in years, every bit as impressive as Pyro's in the Risen Star, yet like Pyro, Georgie Boy got an embarrassingly pedestrian BSF of 92.  Meanwhile, Sierra Sunset, who had a perfect stalking trip behind cheap speed hustled from an outside post, got a Beyer Speed Figure of 99.  For those who would argue that the BSFs do not take into account trip trouble, but merely gauge how fast a horse runs, consider the final 3/8^th mile times for both horses:

• Sierra Sunset - :25.80, and home in :06:47
• Georgie Boy -   :23.54, and home in :05.79 - on the wrong lead!

That's only 12 lengths faster for Georgie Boy!

Is not the singular hallmark and selling point of the BSFs purportedly their ability to determine for the player which horse ran better on the same day against similar competition, yet under different conditions and on a different racing surface? 

Gimme a friggen' break. 

A 12-year-old could watch these two preps and know which horse ran BY FAR the more impressive race.  When you factor-in the closing times, this disparity becomes patently absurd, and utterly indefensible.  Frankly, I have no bloody clue any more what those Beyer guys are even watching, nor from whence their profoundly absurd numbers come. 

What I know is this: if you're still using the BSFs as an integral part of your handicapping arsenal, you're the perfect candidate for a new offshore betting concern that rebates 25% of your wagers.  To open an account, just dial 1-888-Hey-Rave, or go to HeyRave.com, and type in keyword: Imaflamingretard.

Rave

Before I have some fun with Amateurcapper, a quick word about Monterrey Jazz for those who used him in the SA P6, and ate the frog.  MJ's sire, Thunderello, had an AWD during his career of 5.9 FURLONGS, the shortest AWD of any stallion in the Big ‘Cap, and one of the shortest of any stallion currently standing in the U.S.  While horses like this occasionally will out-run their lineage in lesser events, the percentage who do it when it counts, i.e., Derbies, BC's, Big Cap's, etc., can be counted on one hand.  Based purely on historical precedent - and what is this game about anyway but knowing that history, and applying it to your advantage - I'll be very surprised if MJ's performance yesterday doesn't mirror that of another highly touted overachiever come the 1^st Saturday in May.

**********************************************************

I love Jim Rome.  The other day, Romie was railing on N.E. Patriots' running back and Team Captain Kevin Faulk for getting busted at a rap concert with "the hippie lettuce!"  After reading Amateurcapper's latest blog, I'm convinced more than ever that SoCal Bob is a huge purveyor of the lettuce!  C'mon, Bobby, fess up.  No way you could have written this on the square.  Somewhere in your immediate domain there had to be a humongous blunt already ¾'s mangled, if not a bong the size of a base drum.

Being a dyed-in-the-wool contrarian is one thing.  We all know the type.  On any given day they'll argue with fervor that 2 + 2 = 3.  But even most of them have the good sense to remain docile when proven wrong.

Not Bobby!

Turns outs Bobby was the 6^th person on here to view the tape of Best Book.  Not only did the other five of us bet him, most of us bet him with both hands, and one even singled him in the last leg of a massive P6 carry-over @ 12-1, which takes huge conviction re that which he saw on the tape was unmistakable, and irrefutable.

Not Bobby!  Too "ouchy!" 

OK, I'll buy that.  But if it was me ... if I was the only one on here standing-out in the cold with his frost-bit pecker in his hands ... not only would I keep quiet about it, I'd be hard at work trying to figure-out what everyone else saw, and that I didn't, so as to make sure it never would happen again.  This IS how you best learn the game right?

Forget that!  Not only does Bob get on here and admit he didn't bet the horse after watching the tape, he pens a mind-numbing exposé - in GAINT BOLD ALL CAPS DTS DAN ITALIC FONT, no less - detailing why the rest of us were imagining things, and concluding with a lesson, TO WIT, that in the future, we all would be well-advised to consider not just the previous race, but rather the entire body of work, before jumping to conclusions about rigged horse races.

Ahhhhhh Bob ... oh Bob ... quick question, pal: is it even remotely possible you are unaware that said horse - at the same distance, against basically the same competition, within a matter of days, and with no other changes but a different rider -- looked like a 20-race professional who all but dragged his rider to the lead even before they reached the far turn, then won-off by 5 in a hand-ride, and could have won by 10?  Didja watch THAT tape, Bob?  And assuming you did and weren't, in fact, pounding the lettuce when you wrote this, then what does it take for someone like you to refrain when he's made a mistake from making a giant farce out of these pages trying to prove that he's right, and everyone else is wrong?

Those FRONT WRAPS you droned-on about in giant bold print?  Those were run-downs, Bob, and if my 15-year-old nephew were here he'd explain the difference, not that they have anything to do with anything anyway since trainers use them today on a whim and they shouldn't even be listed in the equipment dossier, so utterly insignificant have they become.  But the rest of this stuff?  Samyn flopping-around in the saddle?  The horse's head jerked to one side on a tight rein?  Having to get out of the way of the winner in the gallop-out because he was going so much faster? 

Are you shi**ing me?

Tell me this, Bob: if these things, to you, all are perfectly normal in any "legit" horse race, what the hell does a boat race look like?  Seriously, do all the riders but one have to wrap their arms around the starting gate poles when the doors fly open for you even to consider the possibility, never mind when the suspected "held" horse comes back days later at a 12-1 ML and wins off like a 1/10 ringer?

Ahhhhh, but you can't fool me with this blog, Bobby.  I know the truth.  You got a hold of some of that Cambodian Red we used to pound in the 70s that made a trip to the frig not unlike a blind-folded trek on roller skates across a water bed, and you're holdin' out on us, right?

Either that, or you've missed your calling.  Sounds to me like you've got future Chief of Stewards written all over you! 

Rave

Lots to report, and some of it actually good! 

On the customer service front -- an area about which we constantly complain -- comes my buddy Brian from Brisnet.  You may have noticed a jaw-dropping anomaly yesterday in the Curlin race.  The 2^nd place finisher was the overwhelming 2^nd choice in the wagering @ 7/2, and figured to have to fall down not to run second.  The exacta probable with a minute to post with Curlin was even money!  Who in his right mind, right?  I made P3's instead.  Of course, they ran exactly that way, and the exacta paid $4.20.  However, the 2^nd place finisher, who was 3.5-1 to win, paid $9.20 to place!  It gets screwier.  My buddies opted for trifectas, cold-cocking the first two horses, using the bombs underneath, and were thrilled when the triple came back 17-1, and paid $36.  Thrilled, that is, until the show price (actually the other place price) on the 3^rd place runner was posted: $81.20! What?  ‘Scuse me?  How can that be?  Seriously, in your life have you ever heard of such bizarre payouts in a race won by a 1/10 shot?  Which is precisely what I asked my buddy Brian @ Brisnet in an e-mail.  He answered within five minutes, expressed mutual profound amazement, said he'd investigate and report back.  He will.  When he does, I'll update.  With the two biggest days in the Carnival yet to come - Super Thursday and the World Cup - clearly there's a wagering opportunity in here somewhere, assuming we can figure it the frog out!  (Is that not the most inexplicable payout in racing history?  It makes the War Pass anomalies from last week seem positively mundane.)

Speaking of Curlin, shortly before the race Clocker 1 informed me that Robbie Albarado's 33-year-old sister died suddenly of a heart attack in Lafayette, LA, the night before, and he wasn't even sure Robbie had been told. Sincere condolences from all of us here on the BB Pages to a great rider, and a great ambassador of the game.

If you didn't see the Curlin's race live, Jeremy has the replay posted on the home page.  If nothing else, watch it for the mind-boggling difference between Robbie and the flying-horse cowboys on the Nad horses.  I'll say it again:  I can't imagine anything that would take more out of an already tiring horse than having his jockey BOUNCE off his back on every stride.  Can you?  Seriously, can you think of anything?  And yet, 80% of the Euro-style riders do it on every mount, in every stretch drive!  I don't know about you, but it flat-out astonishes me that Euro-based trainers use these cowboys.

Those who have been following the Gulfstream meet are aware of yet another staggering anomaly re Gulfstream's $30 million renovation.  Apparently the architectural firm in charge of the project failed to take into account the direction of the setting sun when re-designing the grandstand!  The result is that after about the 5^th race or so, the new, massive grandstand overhang casts the final third of the stretch to the wire and beyond in total shadow.  When I say total, I mean by the time the final race rolls around, the shadow not only blankets the entire racing surface, it extends well into the infield!  So dark is it on TV viewing monitors that the saddlecloth numbers become unreadable, and the silks' colors disappear in a haze of gray.  (Brian informed me weeks ago they had gotten scores of complaints from Brisnet/Brisbet/Twinspires.com clients, to whom they recommended contacting Gulfstream directly.)  I did, and got some nitwit on the phone who suggested the problem was with my monitor!  Yesterday, out of frustration, I called again, went directly to Bernie Hettel's office, got lucky, and landed Pat Mackey on the phone, the Ass't Director of Racing Operations.  It was an amazing conversation on a number of fronts, none the least of which was this: the 7th race reply was running in his office as we were speaking.  Patrick was watching the replay and talking to me at the same time, saying, "Bud, I don't know what you're talking about ... the picture is perfectly clear ... I can every horse on my monitor just as clear as ... Oh my God!  Look at that!  You're right.  They disappeared!"  Patrick, it turns out, worked for 10 years at Teleview Racing before joining management, acknowledged on the record that the lenses they were using back then were for s**t, and speculated that they probably were using the same cheap, outdated lenses today.  (Those who watch the PGA Tour are aware that today's new self-adjusting lenses can make 5-minutes-before-pitch-blackness look like noon.)  Patrick also was aware of these lenses, and ended the conversation by informing me he had a meeting this very morning with Teleview, and assured me it would be the new #1 topic on the agenda!  Hopefully by the time the Florida Derby rolls around, we might actually get to see the stretch run on TV!

Entries begin tomorrow morning (9:00 a.m. EST) for Godolphin's Seven Stars Competition, one of the most unique, challenging, and lucrative handicapping contests in the world.  (Godolphin.com)  I encourage everyone to enter.  Just make sure you have a couple of hours to put your stable together.  Entries close on midnight before World Cup Day.

Finally to the title of this blog.  Pay attention JN's all.

In the last 12 hours, I've gotten four e-mails from long-time bloggers and readers "toking" me for the heads-up on the Stable Mail horse, all much appreciated from the thoughtfulness standpoint.  (As opposed to the racing standpoint, since this is the sort of thing we're supposed to do for each other.)  One singled the 'Book horse to land the P6 ($18,000), another hit the P4 ($1,666), another had the P3 ($1,066), and the last made a nice win bet ($13.80).  None took me at my word.  Instead, all watched the tape, and made their own decisions, based on what they gleaned from the replay.  No surprise there, since that's exactly how it's supposed to work. 

Curiously, not a single one of these folks was "of the Junior variety!"  And no surprise there, either!

Rave

While we await the renewal of the DIRC and the return of Curlin, who's in much tougher than you might think with 3 of his 5 opponents trained either by Saeed bin Suroor or Michael Du Kock -- combined they've won roughly 25 percent of the Carnival races run to date -- I thought yawl might find this interesting.

What follows is Horseplayerdaily.com's Website Audience Profile, as published by Quantcast, one of the industry leaders in gathering and analyzing demographic data for the advertising industry:

"The online version of HorsePlayer Magazine. This site reaches approximately 6,553 U.S. monthly uniques. The site caters to a fairly wealthy, 55+, primarily male, college educated crowd.  The typical visitor reads the Courier Journal and watches CBS News."

By way of explanation, a "unique" is a single entity.  In other words, that's 6,500 different individual visitors each month, not 6,500 "hits."  "Caters to" similarly is industry-unique jargon.  I have no doubt if you asked Jeremy, he'd tell you there are no specific "caters to" in the website's business model v. one demographic group over another, either expressed or implied; and that the website, instead, "caters to" the entire horse racing community, regardless of demographic.  Quantcast will tell you the same thing, i.e., that "caters to," as used in this context, actually means "attracts," such that HPdaily.com, each month, attracts mostly a male, 55+, affluent, college educated audience.

To steal a line from one of my all-time favorite comedies, Groundhog Day: me ... me ... me ... and me!

The DRF appears to share a similar demographic.  However, upon closer inspection, the DRF's income demographic shows that more than 2/3rds of its regular readers make less that $60K annually, while HPDaily's demographic is overwhelmingly skewered to the $60-$100K category.  Similarly, the DRF's educational demographic  shows that better than 50 percent of its regular audience falls in the "No college" category, while HPDaily's demographic is overwhelmingly top-heavy with college educated readers, by an almost 2-1 margin.

Whatever else these statistics may or may not mean, as an advertiser, where would you want your money?  I mean, assuming you aren't selling Rap CDs or feeding tubes.

Octave-the-Rave

BREEDERS' CUP EXPANDS SATURDAY TV COVERAGE TO 9 HOURS

Breeders' Cup President Greg Avioli announced today that the traditional Saturday TV coverage of the Breeders' Cup World Championships had been expanded from six hours to nine hours to accommodate the new Saturday 9-race card.  Beginning in 2008, coverage will begin at 9:00 am and conclude "somewhere around 6:00 pm," said Avioli, noting the typical delays each year for such things as technical difficulties, dead horses, wagon-circling, and the like.

In yet another departure, Avioli announced that the 9:00 am - 12:00 pm time slot, which includes the 3 non-Pick 6 Breeders' Cup races, would be televised on The Golf Channel.  Live coverage at Santa Anita will be hosted by regular Golf Channel anchors Kelly Tighlman, Nick Faldo, and Brandel Chamblee, with additional coverage from TGC's Orlando studios provided by Craig Kahn.  But the biggest surprise was the announcement that live, on track reporting from Santa Anita will be provided during the opening segment by none other than Tiger Woods.

"Even though Tiger Woods, by his own admission, doesn't know squat about horses," said Avioli, "his very presence ensures for this lead-in segment huge ratings.  Think of it as The Barbara Walters Special preceding The Oscars."

Avioli hinted that more announcements v. the 2008 event are still to come, including a much rumored 10^th race added to the event, one that would pit Snoopy's 1 & 2, the Met Life Blimp, The Goodyear Blimp, and the Konica-Minolta Airship in the new Breeders' Cup Blimp Sprint.

Reporting provided by Octave-the-Rave, Reuters, The Associated Press, and the National Association of Flaming Retards

With thanks to Brandon for pointing it out, I just enjoyed Randy Moss' latest blog @ NTRA.com.  Not only does Mr. Moss offer yet a third set of numbers for the Fountain of Youth, he also provides the definitive explanation on how the timer screw-up occurred.  So confident is Mr. Moss of his numbers, he ensures their accuracy "within a +/- margin of :05 seconds."  Here are those numbers:

23.51,  47.00, 1:10.92, 1:36.04  = 1:49.58

Regardless of which set of numbers you choose to accept - Gulfstream's teletimer, the DRF's hand-timers, or Mr. Moss' - ALL THREE sets of numbers place Cool Coal Man's final 3/8ths at between :38 and :39 seconds.  Curiously, Mr. Moss' blog is entitled, "How Fast Did He Run (Part 2)," a reference to a previous blog by the same title about Pyro's closing kick in The Risen Star.

In light of the fact that these two performances bear no similarity whatever, I respectfully would submit to Dean Moss that a more accurate title for his current piece might read:

"How Slow Did He Go"

Rave

I just got notice of a horse in my Stable Mail running back tomorrow whose last race you have to see to believe:  

 Aqueduct  -  February 8th  -  2nd race

As you're watching the stretch run, watch the three riders chasing the leader, and count how many "whip strokes" you see.  After that, back-up the tape to the top of the stretch, and watch only the horse coming-up the rail.  He's the Stable Mail horse.  So that you know, not only was the winner the rank outsider @ 27-1 in this six horse field (!), the SM horse was 15-1 in the ML, but got hammered at the windows, and closed at 9/5! 

Correction:  My apologies for the above.  The information was inaccurate, and I regret the error.

Perhaps there is some perfectly logical explanation for what you are about to see.  For what every one saw that day who bet the race.  Perhaps appearances are deceiving.  Nonetheless, this is so blatant in "appearance," it begs for an explanation.  Without one, it is precisely this appearance of impropriety that helps perpetuate racing's long-held reputation as a "crooked" sport.  Moreover, it lends credence to all who believe that the majority of today's Stewards -- men and women whose primary responsibility it is to safeguard and protect the game's integrity -- are little more than spineless puppets.

BTW, if you comment, do not mention the SM horse's name.  Even though he figures to be 4/5 tomorrow based on the replay you're about to watch, and that half the world saw live, to me the 6F return distance is very strange.  I'm hoping the horse gets the same treatment tomorrow, only less obvious, then returns at 7F or 1M, and by then is forgotten by the public.

Rave

Aside:  Holy S**t: a Maven sighting.  And not just a sighting, a bombshell!  (This must be what it feels like to follow Robin Williams!)  I can't wait to read the follow-ups to that little doosie, including, I sincerely hope, by Dave himself, especially as it relates to the DRF's involvement in the alleged "scam," and where Steven Crist falls into the alleged profit mongering.

*********************************************************

Because the Kentucky Derby has been the enduring symbol of the sport for more than a Century, even the Flaming Retards I know are fairly well-versed on its history.  Even they know that the very make-up of the event with its 20-horse fields and no-holds-barred nature historically has wreaked havoc on one type of Derby runner more than any other: the one-dimensional type.  And while War Pass and Pyro both are one-dimensional type runners - and anyone with half a brain should be loathe to pin his heart strings on such horses ... including me, as I so mentioned -- historically the race has proven far less kind to War Pass types than Pyro types.  One of the most prohibitive Derby favorites in recent memory was Holy Bull, whose sire Great Above, like Cherokee Run, was a pure sprinter.  Thirty seconds into the race and Holy Bull was a non factor.  At least that won't happen with Pyro.

One of the main reasons I so loved Barbaro was because of his versatility.  If you knew War Pass would go to his withers coming out of the gate in the Derby, would you not book every dime anyone wanted to bet on him?  Barbaro not only recovered, he had the natural turn of foot to reach contention quickly, and the bottom from his sire -- and his training -- to run the most remarkable Derby I've ever seen.  I'll say it again: there is no more clear-cut evidence of the utter folly of Beyer Speed Figures than Barbaro's 111 in the 2006 Kentucky Derby.  Fifty years from now when the BSFs are long gone and history does a retrospective on their brief and inglorious day in the sun, it is this number, above all others, that historians will point to with derision, and that will haunt Mr. Beyer's legacy long after he's dead.

As for the sire debate, I would ask anyone with an interest in furthering his knowledge, if not tempering his enthusiasm for War Pass, to peruse the following:

http://www.bloodhorse.com/stallion-register/CompareStallions/default.aspx

Of particular note is the Average Winning Distance comparison of these two sires.  Beyond that glaring discrepancy, you tell me on whose son you'd rather pin your Derby hopes?

Octave-the-Rave

Who said you can't learn anything on here?  Are you kidding me?  What other horse racing site has pop quizzes!  Here's a "Yes/No" quiz from the Manhattan Institute's database on logic and assimilation that just happens to involve horse racing:

1)  If American horse racing suddenly became a non-wagering sport, would you stop following it as closely as you do now?

2)  Does the product with which you currently express your opinion ... money ... hold any particular significance for you?

3)  Do you agree that your abiding mandate is for those opinions to result each day in more of said wagering product in your pocket than what you started with?

4)  Given the definition of parimutuel, i.e., "among ourselves," and the unique nature of a sport that pits you against everyone else on the planet, do you agree that every shard, every iota, every scintilla of knowledge that your planet-wide competition possesses that you DO NOT makes their opinions more likely to achieve the ultimate mandate of #3 above, and yours, accordingly, less likely?

5)  Do you possess more of that knowledge today than you did on this day one year ago?

6)  Did you possess more of that knowledge one year ago than you did on the same day one year prior to that?

7)  Do you expect to possess more of that knowledge a year from now than you do today?

8)  Assuming the answers to 5, 6, and 7 above are "Yes," is it not a reasonable assumption that the vast majority of your planet-wide competitors can make the same claims?

9)  In light of said "reasonable assumption," does it not further make sense that with each passing year of your life that you continue to pursue this avocation, and with rare exception - like, for example, the person for whom the sport is profession rather than avocation - that you only will possess more of this critical knowledge than those within your planet-wide corps of competition who a) began this pursuit of knowledge after you? and/or  b) either went broke or died in the interim?

10)  In light of 1-9 above, does it not then also seem a reasonable assertion that anyone whose said "knowledge base" spans ... say 10 years ... is qualified, with similar rare exception, only to assume a mantle of superiority over a) someone whose knowledge base spans less than 10 years; and/or b) is presently no longer among the living?

If you answered "Yes" to all 10, congratulations.  At the very least, you have some clue.  However, if you answered "Yes" to all 10 but don't know why, or don't get the central message of the quiz, that doesn't necessarily make you clueless.  According to the Manhattan Institute, that necessarily makes you a Flaming Retard. 

Hopefully everyone is clear on the difference now. 

Rave