tom brohamer enea·gy! directed by hat brudsha · let us know exactly what you want to cover during...

mr~~--~----• ~\----------~------~ f.:·( ·::~ ~ I I ~ • "\',

A~r: .. ~ a6D

~.,....., . ~· .;, ·,..~

IJS·~RTIN SEIVIINAR Las Vegas

Spring, 1990 Velocity Directed

Tom Brohamer Author "Modern Pace Handicapping"

By

Enea·gy! Directed By "HAT" Brudshaw

Featuring GinnyButler . BQB PURDY The. First I-a~y of PIRCO

Dick Schmidt Michael P1zzoila

Editor_ The Follow Up Father of PBS Numbers Dick has made :t good living from h~ndia.pping with the Marion Jones

Methodology Jincc 1986 PIRCO's Mr. Everything Tom Hambleton

Winner! One of the 14 "new profcssion:U h:mdic~ppen"fcted inJarnes Quinn's new book

Erick Ho!derith An Olympic Gold Medal Winner who is now :t BIG

WlNNER With Energy! Also one ofJirn Quinns 14 expert

~:='"''"~'-'•.*=~ .. ,:;-rr:,., ... ~:·l1~ •• ~1JM;~.::~;}'f!~~~..- hmdic:tppcrs.=-~....,.,..---.~~.tl~~~~ 1,,:-~~~~\1~ >~~·: .• '('t.) "'>4'?i3:_} ,, ·· .~ '"' · , •. ·c; • · •• • Dual Senzi1zc1r Fon1zat!

Copyright SartinMethodology.com – Not for Resale

22

8

1e a

...___,, '":..>--..

Seminar Schedule Friday, April 27

Beginners Session I p.m. to 4 p.m. This session is designed to those new to the Sartin Methodology.

Here we will cover Methodology fundamentals and vocabulary. For those of you who :u-e not necessarily "new" clients, this will serve as a good refresher

course.

Seminar Begins 6 p.m. to 10 p.m. Meet all of the panicipating PJRCO Charter Members and Teachers.

Let us know exactly what you want to cover during the weekend. Tonight we'll get starred on the process of covering the incredible range of topics planned for this seminar.

Saturday, April 28 Seminar 9 a.m. to 10 p.m.

Now we really get down ro work! This all day session will go straight through. stopping only for meals and to stretch now and then.

The Encrjzy! session will be for those currently using the n~w~st weapon in our handicapping arsenal. The ENERGY! reaching ream will be headed by Michael Pizrolla, Jim Bradshaw, and Doc Sanin.

The Velocity session will cover Phase Ill and Synergism II. Both sessions are devoted ro solving your problems and answering

any questions you have. There will be plenty of time for informal question and answer sessions between the formal prescm.ations.

Sunday, April 29 Seminar 9 a.m. to 1 p.m.

We'll finish up whatever we didn't cover Saturday, as well as showcasing our newest programs and concepts that are still under

development. We won't leave until all your questions are answered!

PIRCO Banquet

Beginning with a 5 p.m. Happy Hour and then on to a fabulous buffet dinner and live P!RCO cntenainment ... don't miss Doc singing his newest PIRCO fight song and the: unbeliroablL magic of Michael Pizzolla .. A great social evening. Feel free to bring your friends, spouse and children. This evening is about having a great time, not handicapping. Cost is $30 per person.

:--51\:-:;··FOR-

-WLN -PLACE

... 1111 . You will a.cr SYNERGETIC MATCH UP in acti•m with overhead pro;ector d.,play

~ ->ltllO ::···~AY

' ·.:: . SEVEHTH I!AC£

Santa Anita & rllllDHCS. tU11.\} AllDWAHtl. P'uru U.-1.000 4-rur-41il aM upwar4 •hlch lrt ~·'"'"'" ..t tl.t:r::.l •lhu thift """tJ'"- tlal'"'""t· W•itht&.. ,_,u, .... llh, I U 1-..,., •li'u.I2C lk. "...n-•1"""'' t'f I ru1 •tN.r Uu" tlalml"" aJJ.,•uf l lb1..

\ ~'· ' .. ... '•' '•f :.·,.

,';;

~.· 'J t\•

2 4 ' D!Sl~HCE

JAHUAU l. tno VJiut •f rue ~)XJI; uhu h •'""'' 111.700; ucar,4 J.5.JOO; thltll 13,100; ,. .. "h U,.55.o; IIMh a .. Ho. Mulutl pur J).1).!,07J.

lutRHrd Ho1u iotAWiPPSt '• 'h Str ftn Jockq

l\Or

THE REALITIES OF HORSERACING PROFITS

Many 'horseplayers' enter the pari-mutuel wars ·with little

comprehension of the practicality of their winning or their potential

return on investment per dollar wagered. This is like going to war

with no estimate of the enemy's strength. Or worse yet. not knowing

who the enemy is. To be so unaware justifies author Mark Cramer's

statement that the enemy is YOURSELF. The next most potent enemy is

the other person standing in line to place a wager. Collectively

the mob is your foe. They're out to get you and you're out to get them.

And don't kid yourself, there would NOT be plenty to go around for

everybody IF the ratio of losers to winners were substantially altered ..

Statisticians have been keeping copious records on the racing

public's proficiency since about 1920. As confirmed by New York

Times and free-lance racing author Steve Crist, no more than 5% of

race goers actually win money on any given day and only 2% of the

total attendees win with any degree of consistency. For decades the

percentage of Winning Favorites has hovered at around 30% overall, -

with the higher class favorites winning at a 35% ratio to 25% for

three year old fillies and favorites from the lower rungs of the

class ladder. About 19% of the races are won by the public's second

choice, 13% by the third choice and 11% by the fourth choice.

While percentages may fluctuate within the top four choices,

collectively they win from 72 to 75% of all races. Limiting one's

selections to the top five public choices (and ties) ups the

percentage to 83%. A fifteen year survey of the low five (and ties)

Morning Line odds choices made by the track odds makers throughout

north America, raises the percentage to an average of 86%

Further, the five low odds (and ties) Morning Line horses pay

higher average mutuels than their public odds counterparts.


With this statistical base going for it. I find it bewildering

that only 20% of the racing public can break even and 75% lose.

Not so my colleagues. From Ainslie to Ziemba they all declare

that the odds made by the racing public are amazingly consistent

with a horses real chances and over the course of a full days

card, the collective public's choices and handicapping skills will be

superior to those of any group of experts.

Quoting renowned author James Quinn from page 58 of The Best Of

Thoroughbred Handicapping:

A melancholy thought for mnny handicappers regards the collective wisdom of the !Jetting public. No matter the genius of the individual handicapper, the crowd as a whole does it better. Imagine a select group of notable handicappers, to include per-haps Robert Dowst, Colonel Bradley, Howard Rowe, Ray Taul-bot, Tom Ainslie, Andy Deyer, Steven Davidowitz, William Quirin, Huey Mahl, Henry Kuck, and the top two or three professionals on every local circuit. Could these experts not ex-cel the crowd?

They could not. Performing at their best, the small group of experts could be

expected to lose approximately 15 percent on investment. Pub-lic choices lose only 9 percent.

On the surface this statement appears patently ridiculous and I'm qJad

that neither my name nor the names of any of my associates was on the

list. The caveat here is, of course. that the 'experts' would have to

make selections and wagers in EVERY RACE on the card, and they would

have to do it Every Single racing day forever. James Quinn is one the

most astute Thoroughbred Racing authors of all time1 a fine fellow

with a tremendous intellect and a doctorate from U.C.L.A. I admire

and respect him enormously. Yet I question the accuracy of the above

quote because I know its etiology.

It has been stated by every Handicapping writer of the 20th Century.

that no one can beat the races by playing every race on a day's card.

"Selectivity" is the buzz word for all professionals. James Quinn.

as most of his 'Expert' contemporaries learned handicapping from one

of the greats of another era. In Sir James' case it was Tom Ainslie.

We all know that Ainslie repeatedly enunciated Quinn's conclusions,

as did whoever influenced Ainslie.


I have yet to meet a handicapping author or acknowledged expert who

does not parrot the notion that public choices are a good barometer

of reality and that you can't win betting ALL the races. Author Dick

Mitchell is almost ferocious in his adherence to these notions.

Yet it was he, in the days when his wisdom was at its highest,

who said: "Don't trust the words of any Expert unless you validate

them for yourself.!" I have. I find that the uniformity of expert

opinion on these subjects is, in itself. suspicious. An astute

newcomer to the handicapping wars might even wonder if there were

some kind of conspiracy involved. Five generations of handicap~ing

experts, all with different approaches, each arguing that his was

best, yet agreeing that none of them could truly beat the Races en

toto, just a few select events.

When he was a beginner and prey to the experts, Tom Hambleton

accepted-these popular myths. Now both he and I take a left turn at

this juncture. We feel that an expert who can only win certain kinds

of races is no experts at·all. He/she is a specialist. They're like

doctors who only treat i~grown toenails or disorders of eye, ear,

nose and throat. Like surgeons who do prostates but not abdomens.

You're lying in the street bleeding to death but they can't help

because accident victims are not their specialty. Most American

Handicappers are losers. Persons like yourself who buy books to

become winners deserve not a 'specialist' but a general practitioner

who can treat ALL the ills that stand between you and your goals.

I am not a handicapping specialist. My only specialty is WINNING

and teaching others to WIN! Any race in which every horse has at

least three north American Running lines containing the fractional

time, position calls and beaten lengths is a "Playable" Race!

2


One of my closest associates, Jim "The Hat" Bradshaw, of Tulsa,

Oklahoma, earned the awe of several luminaries at Handicapping

Expo '90 as they watched him take winnings from race after race.

His profitable exploits promted the fabled Len Ragozin to protest

that "The Hat'' could not possibly be using the 'Sartin stuf'

because NO method was that good. In truth Bradsahe WAS usinQ Sartin

Methodology figures which, through thousands of hours spent as my

computer programmer, he had stored in his head. He was using a short

cut procedure not unlike the one described in this book.

It is a matter of record that Bradshaw plays every race on every

card. (except those with first time starters or no North American

record) on every card Then, when the track or "horse book" closes,

Jim will want to wager on the cockroaches scurrying around in a race

to beat the guy who sweeps up.

THAT is a true handicapping EXPERT!

Yet, Bradshaw is NOT, by contemporary 'expert standards, a HANDICAPPER.

He never looks at the Conditions of the Race in the small print above

the past performance charts: he virtually ignores the date last raced.

He is not concerned with claiming price or allowance values.

He eschews all information regarding trainers andjockeys; his only

concession to class is an occasional cursory look at APV (Average

Purse Value;) He snarls at alleged post position or inside-outside

bias. Bias to him is Early, Late or none. He never looks at workouts

and has absolutely no idea of what is meant by the term, "bounce."

Once an inveterate loser who studied all these mainstream factors,

he became a consistent winner after I convinced him that "The HORSE

Runs the Race." Thereafter, the HORSE became his only concern.

A former track coach, now in the Oklahoma Coaches Hall of Fame,


Bradshaw became master of The Match-Up.* His thesis is ~It's NOT

what the horse can run, it's how its going to run against TODAY'S

Match-Up. While mainstream expert handicappers are laughing at

him, Bradshaw is laughing all the way to the bank.

You may well ask, "How can Bradshaw possibly win ignoring all those

VITAL factors?" Bradshaw's reply: "How come YOU CAN'T?"

A lot of Horse Race bettors think the track is their enemy. You've all

met the guy who swears that whenever HIS horse is in a photo-finish or

an inquiry, the steward's decisions always favors the lower odds horse

so the track won't have to pay out as much. Moreover, this guy also

knows that the stewards have it in for him and no matter which way

their decision goes, he gets the shaft. Of course we all know better.

The track could care less who wins or at what odds. (except for minus

pools.) The track. gets its take, which for the sake of expediency,

we'll arbitrarily up to 25%.

It is reported that in 1989 11.2 BILLION DOLLARS went through the

Thoroughbred and Quarter' Horse track and legal off-track mutuel

machines. This figure does NOT include Harness Racing or, supposedly

money wagered in Nevada, legalized Mexica~ Books, or bets taken by

illegal bookies. Now, let's break down that 11.2 Billion and see

what's left over for you and me:


TOTAL HANDLE TRACK TAY.E (25%) BREAK EVENS(20%) WINNERS (5%)

$11.2 Billion 2.8 Billion 10 Million persons $8.4 Billion

AMOUNT REMAINING:

ANOUNT RE-DISTRIBUTED TO PUBLIC: $8.4 Billion

8.4 Billion dollars paid out annually to the racing public. According

to New York Times racing writer and handicapping authority, Steve

Crist, a scant 5% of horse race bettors win on any given day. Only

2% benefit consistently. I got the 2% figure from a high-ranking

Washington, D.C. IRS official who is a client. (God help me.)

He states that 1% of all winners come from syndicates betting huge

sums on exotic events. This groups earnings are easy to trace

because they entail filling out IRS form. The other 1% win by

grinding it out and their winnings are not so ~asily traced.

This is the group that most concerns the IRS. (just in case you

are thinking about evading your taxes.)

With only 2% consistent wlnners we are left with a lot of potential

profit for those of us wi~ling to dedicate ourselves to the task

of successful handicapping.


To make these facts meaningful we must breakdown the TOTAL number of

persons who placed the original 11.2 billion through the machines.

Paid TRACK Attendance in 1989 was 42 million. Another 8 million

wagered Off-Track. The problem is these figures do not. tell us how

many DIFFERENT people were involved. Was it one million persons

fifty times? Not even the Tracks know. I've been asking them and

their various associations for years.

Racing is, however, pretty much a loyalty sport. The same Steve Crist,

along with sociologist, John Rosecrance, say that 40% of all race fans

·are repeaters who wager more than three times per week. Accepting this

surmise leaves us with about 20 million serious bettors. Subtracting

from the gross of 50 million leaves us with 30 million casual race fans.

The Daily Racing Form has released figures indicating a maximum daily

cumulative sale of 200,000 weekdays and as many as 300,000 on week-ends

or holidays.

A recent book evaluating ACTUAL Rac~ng Form sales states that on

its BEST day the Form might sell a maximum of 100,000 copies in

ALL of North America, excluding Mexico City. Since southern California

tracks alone cite daily attendance figures of 50,000, this revelation,

if true, means nirvana for the serious handicapper; doom for

the casual fan.

The sale of handicapping books by major publishers: Wm. Morrow,

Simon & Schuster. Houghton-Mifflin, et al, indicates an average sale

of 5,000 copies per year per title.


Andrew Beyer cracked the all time sales record with about 40,000

copies when he went into paper back. William Quirin's first book is

second on the all time best seller list with over 20,000 hardcover

sales in a year. Mass sellers of racing systems or information

would have us believe that their are hundreds of millions of

different persons (winning with their system) regularly attending

tracks or legal off-track wagering centers.

There is little evidence to support more than a maximum figure

oi Crist's 20 MILLION. even if we were to include Non-Legal

wagering. My personal figure for truly SERIOUS handicappers is

6 million. tops. A devoted race attendee does not a handicapper make.

If we could divide that 8.4 billie~ profit by the ACTUAL number of

potential recipients we'd really have something solid to go on. But

since we don't, let's just produce figures from a mathematical

equation designed to be both conservative and relatively accurate.

By my reckoning, allowing for the 3% casual winners. if the

TWO PERCENT of consistent winners divided their profits equally,

they would each receive $95,000 per annum. This is an amount well

worth working for. Of course there is no share the wealth program

for handicappers, so most winners make substantially less than

$95,000, which means that a FEW make considerably more.

However, to show a large profit even the most professional handicapper

would have to wager at a rate of $120,000 a year to make $80,00 with

a Return on Investment of 1.50% (.50 profit per dollar wagered.)

If one wagered on five races per day 200 days per year. this would

require an average per race wager of $120. Not really too high

IF your handicapping produces a 150% R.O.I. But disastrous for the

"horseplayer" who cannot consistently achieve this level.


Simple logic and long observational experience tells me that the

average winner, though capable. is psychologically unable to bet

at this level. Hence, the potential annual return to the consistent

winner who makes the proper wagers is well within reach of ANY

dollar amount one wishes to derive from the above facts.

It bears repeating that of the 5% who win 60% do so with luck,

numerology, color of silks, jockey-trainer names or their mother-

in-law's phone number: their birth date or social security numbers,

or sticking a pin through the cover of the day's program and playing

each horse whose name is pierced by the pin. The IRS pays little

attention to these persons because they are-highly-unlikely to

repeat since they fluctuate daily.

The other 40% of the 5% is split into two groups: Windfall bettors,

usually in syndicates, making big sums with large wagers in exotic

poo!s; and the grinders: consistently proficient handicappers who

specialize in the straight WIN, Place, Show payoffs. The ones that

the IRS worries about since they're hard to trace unless they spend

well above their reported income level.)

The bottom line remains that only 2% of the racing public is getting

the major share of that 8.4 billion dollars.

Perhaps now we can all understand why the American Psychiatric

Association has so much trouble convincing people that horse

racing is a gamble that cannot be won.

Somebody out there is getting a healthy share of that 8.4 billion.

Why not YOU7


Synergelic Malch-Up II

And Kine!ic Generolor

Synergetic Matchup II with Kinetic Generator Graphics was designed for

the client who wants to advance from Phase III velocity but who, for

one reason or the other isn't ready for ENERGY!

Cost may be the factor. If so, Synergetic Matchup II with Kinetic

Generator has been priced half way between Synergism II and Energy!

It is available for IBM and compatible computers ONLY! It requires

a written contract and a one year subscription -or one year extension -

to the Follow-Up.

The price, Including the mandatory Follow-Up subscription is:

$ 331.00

Synergetic Matchup II WITHOUT the Kinetic Generator requires no

Subscription and no contract. Its cost is:

$ 249.00

{(J


If you opt for the lesser program you are forewarned that ycu are

sacrificing a tool that is second only to ENERGY! itself.

Ener-gy clients t-.11 shine the ~:inet i c Generator. plus the one yee.r

Follow-Up subscription or extension. the TOTAL cost is:

$ 171.00

So. in reality the KG is costing you $99.00

Our decision to ''Force-feed" the Follow Up is based on three years of

analyZing the skill level and quality questions asked by Follow Up

subscribers vs. Non-Subscribers. The difference is staggering.

To all serious clients the Follow-Up should be a must. What we're doing

is assuring that contention.

To give you same indication of the power of the Kinetic C~erator for

Energy! users, AND the magnitude of Synergetic Match-Up III for NON-

Energy! users. we are dedicating a lot of time at this gathering to

demonstrate these powerful new tools via computer transmission to

rear screen projector.

30 days ul!er purchase =

Discs m us! be Individually mode using

Your personal serial #

Ear lies! consideralion lo Ini!ial Purchasers

II


9th Santa /\nita

111 31 ll i'l )I 11 2t Z\ 71} 85J SJ 11l ll 3! 11 11 )Sj )-1 l'j 21j

~-!SA 1 :471112 1J7lfl 1115 Slj 52j 211 21l llftr~B•oh ou' bumptd

Wanrn RJ.i-ll ProptrRidrr,Bnidict'IPrinltPtlonr J Sibillt R 1 r.roJ 17-llllllndT!b,Sndci'IPrnli,KntudJI~ ~ CplW ~n Jqn lnrH !li-17 Chillon. NoCommilmtnl.PooiParlJ ! Clupm.1nTMJ Aw170CIJ n-t! Btni1ict'1Prinll.Finli"d.RdidRo6 31j Valrnm~PA l_ll(ll)J 1'>-11 Sucll!nd'tHio,lumDnd1,HoSIO!J II

V.l!~ lSA 11 :Z2l ,451 Ut II II 117 lllir.!'l-JSA I,HS!J,W Ullgd ll 115 lfu!S 1SA 'I' ,2] :4t U£ 1fl II 117 ~!l-JHol I :21 :4tt 1:09'11 41 Ill

l.'fun-Stumbl•d b

RACING FORM SUNDAY MARCH 11,21-"'99~0 __ _

15. c. 4, bJ Tlron-Trrrch Srmo, try Mu1tr H.Jrn:!' l!r.-Dbdd~riodtr R Jil (V.a) 1!'90 4 2 1

~ 1131 S!j 41 41j3l] Hakal.lni C S! 110:()) 81-C! Jm S'm O"d OimtTimt .I

3"' lj 21j 11j ValtnlUI~ F Hl 'lYYX! lf-17 OlmeTime.GoldtnSolditr,RodBiltHI )l Jlj)lj 2'>d OliYJttl F! 2\(l)j &-~Gum Swapp!!, OlmtTirni,Pap.lSLln 1

.p Jlj Jlj ll J-Rate AYg.: -3.3

25ftb91-Brokt ••kwardfy llftb!ll!SA 1,!,-~IU~tWsr 1l.h~-lSA 1q.45' t09' U1lgd

IUYI9)-8umped 1/11

'11 116 ll Jlj 3j 1lj Valon!UIIa P A! 1Srol IS--21 Bndc!'sPrnt,ThMhrsCs,H11AndSpd 8 3j 116 51 Jl I"" Jnt V•lrnzutla PAl 2\(l)j ll-11 lfitldOIVitw,McGruff,ThtMhlfsCs'

IJa~ lSA 1A ·4&.1 UOl1-41lh ll 111 .Pl S'j s< 3l Valenrurla P A! l10CII !1-nl HrryAndSpdy,KntckyStt,ThMhrsCs I b:ei~Hol 1~ ,4111: 1211:4l1ft 1l 1091 )4 )4j31j31 HakaLlni C S 1 lro:ll 12-17 Clt~VirwBoy,Firld(JlViw,ThMhtiCs 8 ~~~" ;~·~,--,IK~~~~~~~;m~~r,;~~~~;:~;,::;:,:~;--~-!SA ·41 1 1.111144 ft 1 116 6lj 8'jf01j 8'] lim R Q1 15 Gnyll'r~II,HurrybdSpdy,R-.Forc II

150:1!1-ISA 1J :11< :W 1.15111 fJ 11& 9!] S'j 9' 811 BliCk C AI I-ll Sng-11 JmhBtr,ChrlitChlmtrs,ThtMhrsC! I

Ovtrall A,!l-' -2.!1 ,./' mliSA lini;CI

"-".t.n\.>i GENERATOR

RAW ENERGY FACTORS

Name Total Hidden Fx Med Lex 3rd ESP Type

----------------------------------------------------------------------RA K 52.99 65.07 67.21 67.58 32.42 51. 3 3 SIP Presser

BENI 52.50 65.08 66.74 67.73 32.27 50.11 SIP Presser FIELD 53.30 65.28 66.48 68.30 31.70 50.78 SIP Presser JUNG 53.05 65.70 6 7. 41 66.79 33.21 52.70 Sustained

MAHER 54. 18 6 4 . 8 3 66. 4 9 69.31 30.69 50.90 Early

MATCH-UP PROFILE

" " " ,. .. * ,. ..

Total Med 3rd

--------------------HIGH >» 54. 18 6 9. 31 52.70

AVERAGE > » 53.20 67. 94 51.16 II£ II AuTo AD(. LOW »> 52.50 66. 79 50. 11

Race: saraki Dist 8.5 FURLONGS Comments:

====================================================================c=========c

Name

MAHER

FIELD

JUNG

RAK

BENI

Pace

MAHER

RA K

BENI

FIELD

JUNG

Total

54.18

53.29

53.05

52.99

52.50

F 1

56.98

56.98

56.53

56.4 9

56.21

55.52

RAW

Median Factor X

68.68

68.23

66.88

67.71

68.18

Hatchup

F 2

54.30

54.28

53. 13

53.87

54.30

52.81

66.48

66.47

67.40

67.21

66.74

F 3

53.64

50.71

52.33

51.60

51 . 4 8

53.64

t4

Name

FIELD

RAK

MAHER

BEN!

JUNG

Name

ADJUSTED

Total Median

53.99

53.99

53.99

53. 99

53.99

68.22

67.69

68.69

68. 13

66.88

Deceleration Ratio

Early Late

Hex

65.90

66.16

65.66

65.93

66.55

Total

i ------------------------------, FIELD 99.04

MAHER 98.63

BENI 98.30

RA K 98.00

JUNG 97.51

92.48

90.24

92.92

94.46

99.07

I 91.591

89.011

9). 351 92.571

96.60~


E p F W H

MAHER 1

FIELD 2 3

BENI 3 4

RAK 4 2

JUNG 5 5

Doctor E

MAHER ----~~--------RAK

FIELD

MAHER

RAK

JUNG

E

5

2

3

4

1

RANKINGS

=====~:::=•

s p

4

3

3

2

F X

---

4

4

3

2

JUNG

RAK

BENI

Doctor P

Doctor E Hatch Up

X X

X X

X X 3 4

X 2 3 X 2

X X

X X

X 4 X

X X

X X 5

X X

X X

X 5 X

X X

L X Huv

5 0.00

4 1. 23

3 0. 91

2 0 .·61

2.74

Doctor s

X 2=RA K

X l"'MAHER

X 3=BENI

X 4=FIELD

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

-------------------------------------------------Start 1st 2nd 3rd 15 ······---- -.

S"'JUNG


HAT•:;H-UP

Race: saraki Dist 8.5 FURLONGS Conunen ts:

================~===========================================:===========c=====~

RAW ADJUSTED

Name Total Median Factor X Name Total Median Hex

-----------------------------------MAHER 54.18 68.68 66.48 MAHER 54.74 69.61 66.58

FIELD 53.29 68.23 66.47 JUNG 54. 57 67.59 67.27 ------~--- ---- -·----~- -------- --------- -- -- ---------- --· - ---·- --------

JUNG 53.05 66.88 67.40 RA K 54.51 68. 34 66.80

RA K 52.99 6 I. 7 1 6 7. 21 BEtll 54.26 68.47 66.26

BEN! 52.50 68. 18 66.74 FIELD 53.05 67.06 64.74

Matchup Deceleration Ratio

F 1 F 2 F 3

Pace 57.71 5 r:;. I) 3

MAHER

RAK

BEN!

Doctor E

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

1

2

3

4

MAHER

RAK

JUNG

Doctor P

JUNG

RAK

MAHER

Doctor E Match Up

X 1

X

X

X

X 2 3

X

X

X

X 4 5

X

X

X

X

X

Doctor s

X l=MAHER

X 2 .. RA K

X

X

X 4=JUNG

X

X 3=BENI

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

-------------------------------------------------Start 1st 2nd 3rd


1/L' 1st Gold en Gate

1 ~ MJL£$. (1~}(,} STA~T£~ HA.HDlCAP. Puutt1~J-rur~hh.,.whlthN•JJ?~'1HI ~

$1~ ~r ftn tl~t HnunM~ t, 19t1. , 21 ~ I [- 1 - J q .. u. ) ' I 1.- /

D~. 1L.,!.. t.. l(!Qy), b,. Touc~ of Ablllt,-Ph* lubbh Gum, b,. dol-.rti,. Interentlal ('1 r.., lr~Pird9 rr D J (tal) ·1'1::..- 1m J 0 t Z $7-"l

FOX W I JR 120 Tr.-,rltfltt.t ~"'' tfl 11m.,., 4

1 11

01 ! $5,m

0""--T"''IIN M M LH•tlmt 7 1 1 l tll,"-3 • II,)St 1Q'rl>'ll-7GG 1 ,~)l 1:11' Ulllt 10 117 2' 31 3'1 ~~ ~For WI Jr J A~l1rol 71-11 Sngrrlrme,IAIIRtlons,BiueSiilthl 10

lt"rt"-Siii'Oiiolat!;"F'f>.ced lhird lhrnuqh dil~ualilicalron 75loili-lGG 1 .~ 1:1011:34'ft lj 111 4l )2 4llllV.,!I>iarrrn P.JJr lh21~ 11-ll Rrd Tt~clon, Dtraj,lntrrrntilll I 10H-75M 1 cti•47'1:12 1:37'1m 17 117 '' 5' 41 41j Han11n R 0! h\!5(1) ~ 1l Fin!nciaiiVilord,lilunlrn,f.IIRmns! ~!S !BM 1 :1511-1011:36111 11111 4'! )2 J11 i'j ~Warrrn R J Jr l 1£@ 11-11 AIIRta\on\,lntmntiai,Ti11Promi1t 7 11:>:-t~ tBM 1 .~5' 111 US h II 117 51 )I 7lj 8' l Ca1t>non A l! l!!!fJ Sl!l Timrly Wi1h, NoblrOr.,Ti~..>Promil! l ~~-lEM 1 .~11:111 US•fl 'lj 118 l'! J1 11 1• -1' HJnl!n R 0 ~ M11:00 11-11 lntmntii,JosO'MIIt.CrndTriumpn 10 fuM IBM II :li :W 1.10211 !I 11S 7! GIO 710 l'! Han1roRO• {iirrt~id•o !1-tl KhiMRo9r,Kndltlt.loolnfor9dlm !

Sp~~rllndn: lost Race: -4.0 3-RJCe AYg.: -U 5-Rue A•g.: -3.! Om; II AYg.: -4.1 {'!; ft\Ht SfrHU•H N..., -;,;·.J~r'i 3 ~

P l I . . > e. I· 3\l.ru•tt P or D Llhllmt 3 1 0 1 S5,!15 '---" . . ·-··-- nJJ'l9:1-!GG ~~ U1.J;J5lfl !1117 '6'! P ~~- 411 -Warirn"R JJr r r.mJ ~-13 Vrrbll!dri,Rr91SI~.Ri!ACommndr 6

1&!t'·~· '7- t t I. t- 3(....,), try ru!Mf Dtllat-toltl trotto, '"t rat~ttr's '••tt• f - - 0 , j t..-\ lr.-5twnnwr l Ill (C.. I} 1m Z 1 I I ,7!10

STEIHEJ:! J J 1 111.,111 114 t..--C!fi•W a..... 7

( 11t1 7 1 t • 1.3,.m · 0wft.-$hlbma• L M llft1 ... t I Z t I ~12)23 1 i/ lor! I t I I 27~3GG -.:'1 :~5'1-lOl p71! 11111 Jl Jl Jl Jl ~-lloplr S1 ~~'II AlllrlloWn,DIInclrNcbi,Fttrf.toU 7

V~mptdllart 11~BN L&~.U~.J:401fl ~lBII 1 :45'1:10ll:)!;lft 1~7511 ,, :221 :45-' t.ll fl ~BII II ,221 ,451 UO It

I~Studird s!MI

13117 ~m !S111 11117

41 l'l 7hd 1,. ·IJ.Iaplr S I 1M 10 11 ftthrGiollo,Phur'IArF-.,(oldnPol 7 5'1 51 511 Sill llaplt S! W ~-11 AIIRwon\Jntr

Grace In Motion y.' WI\RREH R J JR r

\ Own..:: }:'iii\On Ct~rr-thf')(r S

' {iQ.:te! IE U 1 ·1&' 111' 1 37'fl ~ llSrf~ IBM If 22 ~5 1 110 It

IOk'f\1 lrmr !I ,]JI ,15 U0'f1 IC!vf8 .eurr rrd 11111

B. I.{, 1>, ,t.t,.,..•tvm-Srll !If\, &y lhllu Ho•l l!!r.-'r'lil>on c...,tonct S (C•I) I'll!!

118 h.-lmtl II '(ll 1~7 llftllmt I l 1 I S.H,5.14 ~-

ll 118 lj116 1! 117

)lj]j 21 1l .;..M·r'r 5' cr;Brlgmr 1'i 25 Solid[iq\lGrwlnMolion.B,gSquw 7 1'~ 1'1'' P! +lo'r'·tS' '((l]Cou•lship !l·ll Grclnl.l~to•.BgSqu".T Mrpnr'slw 11 41 4J 4'! 3' ~I S 1 1 0 $16..)!5

(2.lk>;ffl3DI1\I $jf:1Z1 ,CS111) H '1-5 117 )1 ~ 511- Olhoul\![1 t'b~-- No$1rsh,SumthingRrt,Chrmed0nr i ~fctl-[md; Burnprd

!;f llJI)!'l 71iol If o2L.:illUOlll '11 117 Slj Ill 4lj il-+' Dl"oumfl ~A.llcY:\l 11-H My Trrai.BooiC?IIrclor,Unpainlrd I ll»tS 1Hol f~ 1 tn•1 JS~ft Zj IZO 11 Jl ~!j 41~1acl CAl Q)hl:l:tll 1l-15 SliclrWti,SugrplumGI,HicioryCrsl £

17.1~-Bvmpr1al 1-tral IN.?r!! !Hoi 1 t1) 0 Ul 1 JSIIm 7 118 Jl 31 Jl! ~~ t- Elnl C A1 ~h~ ~ 15 RinlrrRngd.BobOILighUori'llighl I VA."~ ISA 1ljfl'[l.ll' «11!Pim1 I 119 l'l 11! 21 2·1~ llcCrrnCJt t'hl700) 11 X Drraml,Bool Collrclor,Jodoia l !""!S ISA ljl21l W 115111 '4·! 1ZO z; 21 2! Pj4- McCmCJl q:A~~ !:1-H BooiCollctor,Brgh!Siyi,GiwngRsm 1 /n~SA if :21' ,15l110'gd '1-l 11l 31 411 Jl Jl-1"1 McCrrnCJl (;Ao~ M.lllBooiCollclor,Sttlll,CiowingRsum 1

tr:>Jj!1-0i·,~u~IJ;rd aod rla•rd sirlh: Bumrrd h>rdll!i 1I~-1~A II ,zp ,45 UO ft '1 Ill 5'1 l'l 2l 21l·Hiacl C A! f.bJ)(l)J fl.]g Forr~rnin9.BooiCollrclor,Srtllrll 7

2Jtt~- 1'/,rl, 3/! lor" 11~ 5SA ~jUJI :« 116'11 'I 113 £1 t'J 51J Ill BIJci C AI ~A.liOOl U-12 CstlCmmssn.(hdUmbi,BrghtSlyf 10

17~-Brolr s'r•lr 1~ !SA 61 ,212 :.W 1 Wfl !j11l 9!j 61 Jl 2no-t BIJci CAl {!AwliOCll ltiO FunAtlh!Sir,BooiCollrclor.Drtml I

1~- Vwrd in 1la•t Sp~rd l'ldtr: larde .' 1~! 12 1 3 0 m,l125 O,n.-W>Itrr R H J ]-T•>f .n,( Ufttlmf 14 1 l 0 tCI,Jl8 l() Turf t o 0 0 lir~~ IGG If )2'_:45. 1·111'm 25 118 21 1"' II 11j+tonzi7RMI ~A.1tlX1111·1! MiSIWaolrsh,StrYfolis,Myfulurt!

I!J~"?l !BM H :W ,(IJ rl1'1l II liS 41j57j 511 (1 (sln~ntl! fAwl~ ~ 25 Mi AlidJ,(o(lnc!OIII,Ho"YouDon'l5 2&.-.Jl IBM lL221 :451110Jft ~ 115 1'd 11 l'l1' ~ Gor.zlzRM! fA"IWJJ ~ lllmlilllrN•prr.MisiWolsh.SYFolh! td'J.8BM lf J2 1 :4511 tn'ft IJr 12! 71j7•j5~ Sll Corlrl AC! flhW ~-11 AlltJ Top, 1,1, Alicia. lady JJmtl I

l1:lol~- Widr rn l111n '*"t1lSA !JUP :«' UPft 15 119 41 4'1 P '' flortl 0 R I~A~JIOC!l !S-10 KII'Em49n.Sivmoon,WicomPropsl!

~-Sirad1rd 1110 SOct!i 7SA II o22 ,451 UO'II ~ 117 ?»o 1"' 1>• Sll Flcrrs 0 R !f'A•lltm ~-li Dmr!Pro~lrr,Fiing1ipsy,Shrmoon 7

18Sqel !fp If o21 :4511·1PII ll 114 1' PJIS 11 + Flcm 0 R! tMdn t1·1l Mss\\'ksh.Kthy'sChmpon,CigryQn 10 ltry['S9-1P.M If ,1]l :4511·11111 '1-3 117 11 1"' Jlj loi ~Gcr.zJ!•zR M1[.Mdn !1-11 Clifornisunshn,MssWuhh,Msslong7 n,l.'lfliHol If :21 ,45 Uflfl 12 115 3j 21 ]lj ]tj ~Solos Al ~Mdn 13-13 l.fisl)Ball•d.MissWauitsha.JuliBird!

SpHd lodtx: last R1w -1..0 3-R~tf Arg_: -30 ~Ract At;.: -11 Orcrafl Arg.: -4.5 ·' fth II" ~IT :~H ru27£; ~n :UlH .RA 1!111 lifti:001H

y193 ttGintt. I!~ "x"cln} ;i. t;ui~-~O~r,iii;;~d mertlfoui tr~r oldo And up, "llo..,enco, purtt S22,000. · tnd•• tlo•~ I'll rp St "• 'o\ •·, Sir fl~ Joc>ey Odds. -;103- D''""'"'' ~is~-,-, 2 1 3 1 e 1 10 1 ooocy 1 w:

o . .,. .. ti?IO 116 6 5 ~ ·~ ~ n 'hd 2 2'' ~ C!lnn 50 70 .. Flook. Coll!":lr 11e 7 7 ~ hd 2 2 ~ 2 ~ 1'1 T Chpmn 2 50

g 0 ;(1 Whm!J:•' 1 .• 1y . 11e J 6 7 2 6 hd f 'l\ 4 1h 1.11fmln 21 70 · Cl•o'"!nl,l,;n 11! 5 J ~·.; 7'.1 ~·;, 5hd RWrrn 109\l

lg~51J Ml~s Y/,,1 rsh• 111 e 4 6 t•.; J hd .•. 4 I ~ nk 0 8(Jle 26 00. p?61 S~M1)1':"J' . 116 2 e e hd 9 7 'l\ 7 nil J ~.,.,., 9 !/) g0EI Gollirly 116 I 9 9 6hd eJ 55 Bl~l>g 3&0. 9~~~ E~C•t-Btty 116 9 2 21 5hd 9 9 OAMI 37AO.

Jhno. ·213 ·~1 :l :~e I I p~ { Scrnlch~rl- ~ol'y'5 folf V/lnnor-9 I Dlstlncllve ~10 (r:>lllc S!s (r.,...rnl:;h r~tnr:r). Tr.!) /I H'J,t:~"Jr)'. t .. ulv~l hrtndliJ: $111.147. - $2 MUTUELS PAID Dl!>llncllve Sis ••.•• , • • • • • • . . 5.20. 3 80 3.00 Greentlo1e ..... --·····--··· '24.80 7.40 Book Collcc1or . . . . . . . . . • . . . 3.20

~5 Exac1a (5-7) pnld $4 16.50.

I 'i


19 ' ''

' ' ' ' • . .. 17 \

\ '

~H

15

...... '• '·

' ' • . ... '\.

\ ·,

' '

·-.

·"'

' ' . .;·

/'/

/:...-· .... J -.·- / /

.-· ~-.... - - ·:: . .,.,....._ --· ..... _______ _

13'--------------'----"'-------J.--c 2 4 6

DISTANCE 8.5 FURLONG EP DECELERATION

f 1 r 2

Eh~xdc KJ,exdc Lhexdc

8

l:RA X 2=BEtH 3:JUtlG 4:MAHER 5:FJELD

l=R~ R 2=BIHI 3:JUHG 4:HI!HIR 5:fJILD


E N E R G Y G E N E R A T 0 R

RAW ENERGY FACTORS

Name Total Hidden Fx Hed Lex 3rd ESP Type

---------------------------------------------------------------------DISTIS 56.85 64.55

GRACE 56.71 64.73

.GREEN 56.52 64.07

BOOK 56~27 -6 4. 81

HISS 56.22 64.75

Doctor E

DISTI

DISTI

GREEN

GRACE

6 6. 1 0 69.55 30.45

66.56 68.83 31.17

66.35 69.58 30. 4 2

66.59 6 8 . 4 6 31 . 54

6 5. 9 7 6 9. l 0 30.90

H A T C H-U P

No fll!lTTEI\ H

23 \

, .. GRE /, .. ·DIS

....... \ ,·;',· .. GRA 'X

I ·> .. HIs '• \ ~·. \ \·· ... ,,,. ' .. ·BOO ., ,, ,,

............ :, .. , \\ ,,, ,, ' ,....... I, \I

• '., \ (·,'·

\ ··.:.. I I 1 • I I, IJ I, ··~ '\ J I I • _.,. ?

\ ·~·. ·· .. . .·> I I \ \' ·-.. .... .... / ;'l •, ...

" ·-.. ' , ' I \ " / I . " " ----· •'/ .... ,.·J \ " " --

\ •. ·-. ................. .., .... .~ . fF , • - ·. ~··- :~- :- .......... I

21

19 -.. •' -.. -.. '• .. '- ' . ..'"

17 g 2 < 4 6

DISTANCE 6.e FURLONG EP DECELERATION

23 \ )··GREE .... :.:..

~~·.· .· .. ·D SI

~ .... I ,I /"BOOK ..., -. .. ,. HISS ...... ._ "' ,, .... .. - ._ ._ -- - "".,., ,· GO, ..... .... ,.. . ~

...... - -. - .- .... ....... ..... HOJ.f'l ·--. . ......_ .--------

XM

17

14 B 2 4 6

DISTMKE 6.~ FURLONG EXDC DISTRIBUTION

r F Lue. h A TJ u-!. f":: o Go AND w H 11.1 ~

N s

EH TI CE s X


l_tJ _____ _____lJAIL Y HAC: lNG f-OHM SUNlJA Y MAHCH II I ~:IU

8th Santa Anita

I. rn. l, by lh•tyn-My ND

BAZE R A 121 Tr.-Woillln;lum Cto.rles 1m I 2 I 2 - ~ o ... n.-MktmSM.hMhmdR!,hdAf lllrtlm• 1J ~ ~ 2 $H9,114 Tllrl 13 4 4 2 $2.!,714

X r..fb'JJ.SSA 1 (j):451J:03q,~1fm '2 123 •5! Jl 31) 211 BzeRAI ~Bna VsLl H ~-00 Saros Brig, Royal Touch, Nikishk• 10 Z5rr!I93-Gradr lfl: luggrd in lair • ·

X 2fu!9-!Hol l)l,GJ,48l1:121l:47llm '1d23 211 21 2'l JlJ BazrRA~ q)Matriarch 17-W ClirrMrinr,Gtn!riChrgt,Roy!Touch 7 i~8~-Grad1 I

~-7GP 1 (i'l:47l111ll:J71gd nf 123 1171 Sll 6lj 4'l StvnsGLl Br Cp Milt ~-ll Sltinlen, Sabon.1, Most Wtlcomt. 1.1 ~-Grade I; Chrcltd !.Jrly llr

150ctggt5longhchamp!rral a711:21 gd '2jr137 ('f) zt>d DbrcqG PtdrJarortHGrll Gabina,Roya!Touch, Aliocha · 8 ro:l~tSDumldori!Gr!l aln 1:l971f '1 121 Q) 11 RnW GrPrVonDumldorf(Gr1) Royall ouch, TimrToGoHomt, Ktnl 7 11xre'Jt5Colog~t!Grr1 a1 Hlllf '4--5 133 ('f) Pl QuinnT ~Prri!YOnColognt Royal Touch,BoolOfloH,Oiasprina 5 2'llvfllt5Badtn8adln!Gtrl a! Ull1f 7j131 CD Jl Cool P O!ngn Rntn!GrJl ValdesPm,FiliArdroxx,RoJITouch · 1e 11Pmt )[vry!Fral a61 Ul4gd ~ 1Z2 Q) 511 ObrcqG Pt Hampton OrAcirr, Umbelata, Alliu! 10 2~lt !l~ngrhamp(fra) all 1:U191'1.2!123 I'D ~~~ ObrcC PiduPala1RoyaHGrll Po/ishPrmdent,Aliocha,YidesPm '

Spetd Ir!de~: La1l Ract: -2.1l 3--Ract Avg.: -2.3 3--Rac~ Avg.: -2.3 Overall Avg.: -2.3 lllv SSA 3f H :l4 8 Utv BA Jtr\ ~ H rtllBA 5I sd :53 H r till SA 5I fi 1:0011

~ -·- ---·~ -·:-----. -·- -· ';.


I I

Dk. lo..., lo.. "'-I. 17 r,t...,t~hlchitt,..,. Wlr.d, Sao.dt 1ou-nt r.,m (C.I) I'" t I I 2 · fln,Jl'l Brown Bess

KIIEHEL J L 123 Tr.-lt..U ChoriN J tm t I 2 t $:1n.XIO LHrll.,..• :Jil 15 I ~ li..D$7,111 Turl I! 11 4 2 ~1,.015 I'll! 1"" Pl KrniJLI{IYI• Rbn h 101- SrownBss.Drb(sOghtr,ColrdDncr 11

OwF1..-C31fbournt Sbh-lf

11li:ol~-tSA fl',ljl.lll1Jl1t51Jfm I Ill li'!Wl-C11dt I

1\:t:1tHBM a1Y,Ijlll1UI'Hl lm'l! 1~ Jl l'l 1'4 11 KtniJll ~~ J C H !S-17 Bro.-nB!I!,IIililhi,Goldfrttrd!f 5 J'l):f!;-CrJdt Ill

lllt-;tl!Omr 1Y,Ijl~ll,ll1HS 1 1m ! 111 1!1trf1--Gta1r I

Jl.>.rm !GG ll\(114! 1:l7lU5 lm )j 114 lllr£>-Gradt Ill

1! 2"' 2'4 I'* KniJLI {l!hmo~ H tl-11 Bro•n Bm. Oaring Ooonr,Galunpt 7

II II 111 Jlj ChpnlMl G G H ~-II frnli1PtriK~PhnlVritr,SrownB.ls 7

~~~GG ll\Cfl41'1:llll:15lfm'J.l 119 l!j Slj1l 111 k1ULI ~Yb1 Bn1 H rJ.Ifl BroonB!I!,Cimntl~ffltrringNw! ~ 1.11\~GIIdrlll

11,.,_~ !GG 11\ljl ~1'Ul'150'1m II 111 l'l ll!JI Ill Krn!JLI {!Cl f9' H !l-ll B1oon Bm, Bill Oaring Ooonr ll~Gradr Ill; foGdn Fr H "-H lmiltd Guill Brown Sm, Oalonu 7 f!ll.t!}-Grldt Ill

l!Tt~ IGG I ,4]! liP 1Ji'ld 'II 11! lj 7'6 ll 310 k10IJLI {lr~nt~n~n H n.iJ Ho!!ISprilt,ldlhnnbrllt,BrownB!I I , lJa--tliSl 1\1-41 1dl tW I 1 Ill l l ~'l 111 l"l ~ntJll ()Sn Glgno H ll-11 HoRTiw)nnmnn~,WhitMiHhilll I

7!-:ei-CIIdtll 11!17r't-!8M 1\\(j'\ ~1Ul tSO:gd l 111 2'! 21 1l 1l KtniJLI {IHIII!xo H ~ 11 BrownBm,Bibontll,Crirlnggrylion I

ll!b~-va1t Ill Sprrd lr!dPJ: l>~l Rut: ~12..0 3-RH! AY;.: tlJ &-Roc! In;.: +5.1 Dnrall Arp.: +f.f •

•Ftltl c; 'In 1:1tl H IW.,H; llli:«•H ft\ZH; 1H~H frlnH np!f:IJIH

•sherarda 1.1. 4.lry crr ... ul-~hunl,., lry ["'l'!rJ ' ... VAL£ HZUHI\ P A

lr.-H I! ~f' nan (Fra) 1m I I 1 0 n.~OO 115 lr.-D•J'·d->h ~rll 1,., f I 2 I $71,06!

0•"--t-1 HAp Kh•n LHrllrnt I! Z l 2 ~.571 Turl U Z l I . f'J,511 4'l 4'1 4'1 1'1 OlhoutsrEI {lh!IOCil !S-11 fOor ~~~HIIol lhti)WI:I241,4l'lm 'l 11! 7'jlljlj Jlj DHil R Dl ~h!:nJl ll-11 lnYtdGus~Hlh1AndRos,WhtMschlll7

I~Jl-Ranl rarlr lllioY!HIIol 1\\:W USl HS'Il 'II 111 I'd 21 71l )II PntlJr! {!Sin 8/s H 7J..II Appro,dlorly,SrosBrig,ludJSong 1

lV!JrS1-Grldtll 1~-lHol I C!HPI:IO'U-Ilfm ljlli

17'bt>-Troubl•d trip 111~n!SA lql(i).lll :4l l:ll'lm n 111

41 ~~ 4'!1'1 Bm R AI ~h•I:llnrilrdGuti~RinlrtRny_d,OYi'slmb I

71 !ljiO!j !lj B11RA' (IAlmn Dp H ts-05 WznngZon,Ool'rn~gn,Sl~rmJB!Vld.ll 110cilt-l'lidt into llr!lth

IIJir!IIOmr I (j) 1]11:11131 lm 3111! l'j Jl 2! ~·~ Toro P tJh•))lll !t-Il OYir'slmb,MrUmt,RintmRrntgd 7 lJir!llllol ll\(j"t4811:1PHI'Jm H IIi 1" 11 2"" 51 l01ofl ~81 Hl1 H ~t>l tl~rMrint,FitndllimPin,NoR!Yiw I

IJI1BJ-Cradt I i!JI.~Bl-IICfT I (j}48'1:111J!i lm ljliS Jl 1'1 7'-6 J--1 To

19:-----~----~----~----~---.... '•• I ......... AHN-. \ ........... ..,..... ,. / .. Ron ..... J .. -:"""-''""'I' ............ :.:.: .. ~.:.: .. ;,,,,. / ,· ... ' ... fB. RI OD~~

\ "" • ""''·~·'" • • •" -' - - - - -- -. - ,' I "' 11fl . . .. ~ . - - -----* ~ ...... • I ·• ~·· . - ••• - I ,' -'·'' --- -- 1 · · ~-·....... -r- ·. ,----- -' ,.. , .. i NV IT 171 ··- --~--~ ~~ .- -- J . -~· .. ·...... ,. -~ :-:: --' .... /. .. ·ROY-M

--- ,?".. .. . ....:.. I 1: .- ,• ,- .... '- ·_. ' "•,.,, •, • ,' I .'

.I -· ' ·~. ... ~ ... ··., .......... ,' t UH . - .- .. •, I I\. .. •··· ... _ 'I

···.. .·, •, ... · ..... , ,','

·, lo • ..,, '

15r-' -----;------:-----.,!__ ___ _J,·_:· ~~'-

13'--__ ..._ __ .......__ __ --l..-__ _L_ g 2 4 6 8

DISI~NCE 9 FURLONG ~DJ SF DECELERATION

EXexdc HXexdc LXexdc


Narne

ANN ROYL BROWN FIDEL I NV I1 ROY-M

E N E R G Y G E N E R A T 0 R

RAW FNFRr;y FAClURS

rota 1 HlJden rx Med Lex

164. 80 66.32 6 7. 31l 66. 19 3 3. 8 1 16 5. 7 2 67.23 61i. 'd fi 6. 3 7 33.63 163.94 66. "18 6 6. t, 2 b6. lr8 33.52 166.07 66.98 66. lr5 bb.GB 33.32 166. 3 2 6G.34 6G.56 67.26 3 2. 71r 166. lrQ 65.94 6 ti. 7 0 & I. Sir 32.46

·HATCH-UP PROFILE

Total Med 3rd

--------------------HIGH >» X. 166.40 67.54 55.79

AVERAGE >» 165.54 66.75 55.04

LOW >» /\163.94 66.19 54.30

II£.['> ;:1/t:AD] -

Raw Pace Graph

3rd ESP Type

55.47 Sustained 55.79 Sustained 54.42 Sustained 55.52 Sustained 54.71 Sustained 5'·. 3 0 Sustained

X6 X6 X li\NN-2B 2=ROYL

X xs X xs X X X X X S=INVIT

Xl X X 3=BROWN 6=ROY-M

X Xl2 X

X X34 X

X4 X X

X3 X X

X2 X X

X X X

X X X

X X X

--------------------------------------------------Start 1st 2nd 3rd


M A T C H-U P

* * * * * * * * *

Matchup Deceleration Ratio

F 1 F 2 F 3

Pace 56.83 56.03 56.17 Name Early Late Total

----------------------------- -------------------------------ROY-M 56.83 55.57 54. 4 5 ROYL 100.85 101.86 102.73

ANN· 56.20 54.51 56.16 BROWN 100.36 99.57 99.93

I NV IT 56.08 55.72 54.81 FIDEL 99.62 101.64 101.25

BROWN 55.44 56.03 55.40 I NV IT 99.58 9 8. 15 97. 74

FIDEL 55. 10 55.99 55.79 ROY-M 99.18 96.60 95.82

ROYL 54.68 56.01 56.17 ANN-2 98.92 101.02 99.93

RANKINGS

======== E p F W H E s p F X L X Muv

ROY-M 1 1 6 4 2 6 0.00

I NV IT 2 3 5 5 3 5 1.42

BROWN 3 3 3 3 4 4 2.17

ANN-2B 4 2 4 1 1 2 0.77

ROYL 5 4 1 2 4 3. 3 9

FIDEL 6 5 2 5 3 3 3.39

M A T c H-U p,

vr,RIEGATE

SL.1stain~d

Doctor E Doctor s

ANN-2

ANN-2 FIDEL

ROYL f'f@ ff¥ 9 1· i f& I

Doctor P

ANN-2 ''*E9

ROY-M --BROWN


Doctor S Hatch Up

X ·X 1 X 3=ANN-2 6=ROYL

X X 2 X 4=FIDEL

X 2 X X

X 3 X X

X X 3 X 2=INVIT S=BROWN

X X 5 6 X

X X 4 X l=ROY-M

X 4 5 X X

X X X

X 6 X X

X X X

X X X

X X X

Start 1st 2nd 3rd

Doctor E Match Up

X 1 X 1 X 2=ANN-2

X X X l=ROY-M

X X 3 4 X

X X 2 X

X X 6 X 3=INVIT

X 2 3 X 5 X 4=BROWN

X X. X

X X X 6=ROYL

X X X 5=FIDEL

X X X

X X X

X 4 X X

X X X

Start 1st- 2nd 3rd

2.7


SYNERGETIC MATCH UP II • KINETIC GENERATORTM

SOFTWARE LICENSE AGREEJ\IENT

AGREEMENT dated this day of , 19 __ , by and between PJRCO, INC., a California corporation (the "Licensor") and

----~--~-----------------------------------------------------------------•an individual residing at

(the "Licensee") concerning the SY1\ERGETIC MATCH UP II- KI1'ETJC GENERATOR"" Program, a software system written in Basic for the entry and evaluation of parimutuel investments in thoroughbred horse racing (the "Program").

I.~

Upon the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement, Licensor grants to Licensee a non-exclusive, non-transferable license to usc the Program. including all pertinent documentation.

2. IERM

This Agreement will become ciTcctivc on--------------· 19_, and will continue until tcnninat.cd ns provided herein.

3. LICENSE fEE

In consideration of the license granted hereunder, Licensee agrees to pay Licensor a single license fcc in the amount of Three hundred thirty-one do !tars (S33 t ), the payment of which is due in full at the time of the execution of this Agreement. Payment will include a one year extension of current subscri)JLion to the Follow-Up OR a one year subscription if Licensee 1s not a current subscriber.

4. S\JPPORT[NG [X)CUMENTATION

The documentation of the SYNERGETIC MATCH UP II. KINETIC GENERATOR"' Program will be delivered to Licensee at the time of the execution of this AgrccmcnL TI1C documentation consists of the "Preliminary SYNERGETIC MATCH UP II. KINETIC GENERATOR"' Manual" and any other materials and/or documentation which Licensor deems necessary.

5. CONFIDENTIALITY

5.1 Licensee acknowle

6. PROGRESS REPORTS

Licen= shall provide to Licensor ongoing wriurn progress reports, in a form to be designated by Licensor, to Licensor upon Licensors request, documcnGng the performance of the SYNERGETIC MATCH UP ll-KINETIC GENERATOR"' Program. All counseling and system upd:lling shall be dependent upon Licensee's providing of said reports in a Gmcly manner to Licensor.

7. JERMINAJJON

This Agreement and the license granted hereunder shall remain in force until Licensee discontinues the usc of the SYNERGETIC MATCH UP Il- KINETIC GENERATOR"' Program or until Licensor tcrminalCS this Agreement as provided herein. Licensor may terminate this Agreement of Licensee fails to comply wilh any obligation required under this Agreement and the license granted hcrcin. Upon termination, Licensee shall deliver the SYNERGETIC MATCH UP U- KINETIC GENERATOR"' Program and all supporting documentation and all copies of s:Jme, including partial copies, lo Licensor.

8. PROGRAM UPDATING

Licensor will offer periodic Program upd1tcs of the SYNERGETIC MATCH UP ll -KINETIC GENERATOR"' Program to current correction and improvement levels. Licensor shall be under no obligation to provide Licensee with said updates if Licensee shall be in breach of any term of this Agreement or the license granted hereunder.

9. WARRANTIES

9.1 The Program is warranted to conform to the descriplion of its function as outlined in the Prcliminary SYNERGETIC MATCH UP II- KINETIC GENERATOR"' Manual. This means that Licensor will rcmcdy any non-conformity free of charge after it is reponed by Licen= in writing to Licensor during the term of this AgrccmenL

9.2 Warranty suppon for the Program is limited. in all cases. to software errors_ Errors caused by hanlware malfunctions or the usc of non-specified lmdwarc arc not covered. Most errors will be corrected by lclcphone instructions or by the issuance of upcbling documentation, corrective code, etc.

9.3 EXCEPT AS EXPRESSLY WARRANTED, LICENSOR DOES NOT WARRANT THAT COPIES OF TilE SOFTWARE OTIIER THAN THOSE PROVIDED llY TilE LICENSOR SHALL PROVIDE FUNCTIONAL INTEGRITY. LICENSOR DISCLAIMS ALL ODLIGATIONS AND LIADILITIES ON TilE PART OF LICENSOR FOR DAMAGE, INCLUDING, DUT NOT LIJ\IITED TO, SPECIAL, INDIRECT, AND CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, ATTORNEYS' AND EXPERTS' FEES ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH TilE USE OF TilE SOFTWARE LICENSED UNDER TillS AGREEMENT.

9.4 Licensor warrants that the Program docs not infringe tl1c copyrights of any other pany.

9.5 Anything 10 tl1e contrary notwithslanding. Licensor and Licensee agree that the maximum aggrcgalc amount of money damage_, for which Licensor may be liable to Licensee under this Agreement,

resulting from any cause whatsoever, shall not exceed the total amount of fees received by Licensor from Licensee.

l 0. GENERAL PROVISIONS 10.1 This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the stale of California. 10.2 Licensee may not assign, sell, pledge, or sublicense the Program or any rights gran Led

under this Agreement without Licensor's wriuen consent.

10.3 TI1is Agreement constitutes the em ire Agreement of the parties on the subject mnuer of this Agreement and supersedes all prior agreements and understandings which may have existed between Licensor and Licensee. Any amendment or modification lD this Agreement must be in a writing signed by both panics.

10.4 No waiver of any breach of this Agreement shall constitute a waiver of a subsequent breach.

10.5 If any provision of this Agreement is held invalid or unenforceable, the remaining provisions shall nevertheless rcmrun valid.

AGREED to this ___ !by of -------• 19 __ .

PIRCO,INC.

By _______ ~------Prcsidcni/Liccnsor

Licensee


KINETIC GENERATORT"' SOFTWARE LICENSE AGREEJ\lENT

AGREEMENT dated this day of , 19 __ , by and between PIRCO, INC., a California corporation (the "Licensor") and

~~~~--~~-------------------------------------------------------•an individual residing at

(the "Licensee") concerning the Kli'ETIC GE:'\ERATOR"' Program, a software system written in Basic for the entry and evaluation of parimutuel investments in thoroughbred horse racing (the "Program").

I.~

Upon the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. Licensor granL' LD Licensee a non-exclusive, non-transferable license to usc the Progwm, including all pertinent documcntalion.

2. ITRM

This Agreement will become effective on ---------• 19_, and will continue until tcnninatcd as provided herein.

3. LICENSE FEE

In consideration of the license gr:mtcd hereunder, Licensee agrees to pay Licensor a single license fcc in Lhc amount or One hundred seventy-one dollars (S 171), the payment or which is due in full at the time of Lhc execution of Lhis Agreement. Payment will include a one year extension or current subscribtion to Lhe Follow-Up OR a one year subscription if Licensee is not a current subscriber.

4. SUPPQRTING DQC\JMENTATION

The documentation of the . KINETIC GENERATOR"' Program will be delivered to Licensee at Lhe time of the execution of this AgrccmenL TI1c tlocumcnt:Jtion consisLS of the "Preliminary . KINETIC GENERATOR"' Manual" and any other materials and/or documcnmtion which Licensor deems necessary.

5. CONFIDENTIALITY

5.1 Licensee acknowledges that Licensor owns all copyrighLS and other commercial righLS LO Lhe ·KINETIC GENERATOR"' Program and supponing documenUJtion, and acknowledges that Program and supporting documentation, and acknowledges that the . KINETIC GENERA TORn< Progr.~m and iLS supporting documentation anc trade sccreLS. Licensee acknowledges that Licensor owns the righLS to the trade names . KINETIC GENERATOR"' and the . KINETIC GENERATOR"' Program.

5.2 Licensee agrees that it will not reconstruct in whole or in part the object code, source code, or algoritltms of lhe . KINETIC GENERATOR"' Program.

5.3 Licensee agrees Lhat only archival copies and emergency back·up copies or Lhc . K.JNETIC GENERATOR"' Program and supporting documenmlion may be made. and that such copies nrc the property of Licensor, suhjecl to the tenns of this Agreement. A eomplcie list of such copies and their exact locations shall be provided to Licensor by Licensee upon requesL

a.) TI1c following notice shall be reproduced upon all Program copies: "This program is a trade secret of PIRCO. INC. and the Inland Empire Institute. Possession and usc of this

program must conform strictly to the license agreement between licensee and PIRCO, INC., and possession does not convey any right to disclose, reproduce, or permit others to usc the program without the specific

written authoriwtion of PIRCO, INC."

5.4 Licensee agrees that it will not disclose or make available directly or indirectly. all or any portion of Lhe. KINETIC GENERATOR'~ Progr;un or the supporting docurncnt.alion to any person. In general, Licensee shall take reasonable measures to ensure tlklt iLS . KINETIC GENERATOR"'Program and iLS · KlNETlC GENERATOR"' documentation be kept confidential.


6. PROGRESS REPORTS

Licensee shall provide to Licensor ongoing wriucn progress rrports, in a form to be designated by Liccnsor,to Licensor upon Licensor's reque-st, documenting the performance of the -KINETIC GENERATOR""' Program. All counseling and system upJating shall be dependent upon Licensee's providing of said reports in a timely manner to Licensor.

7. TERMINATION

This Agreement nnd t.hc license granted hereunder shall remain in force until Licensee discontinues the usc of the · KINITIC GENERATOR"' Program or until Licensor terminates this Agreement as provided herein. Licensor may terminate this Agreement of Licensee fails to comply with any obligation required under !his Agreement and the license granted herein. Upon termimtion, Licensee shall deliver !he . KINETIC GENERATOR"' Program and all supporting documentation and all copies of s:Jmc, including partial copies, to Licensor.

8. PROGRAM UPDATING

Licensor will offer periodic Progmn updates of the . KINETIC GENERATOR"" Progmrn to current correction and improvement levels. Licensor shall be under no obligation to provide Licensee with said upJatcs if Licensee shall be in breach of any term of this Agreement or ll1e license granted hereunder.

9. WARRANTIES

9. I The Program is warranted to conform 10 ll>e description of its function as outlined in the Preliminary . KINETIC GENERAlDR"" Manual. This means that Licensor will remedy any non-conformity free of charge after it is reported by Licensee in writing to Licensor during the term of this Agreement

9.2 Warranty support for the Program is limited, in all cnscs,to software errors. Errors caused by hardware malfunctions or the usc of non-specified hardware arc not covered. Most errors will be corrected by telephone instructions or by the issuance of upJating documentation, corrective code, etc.

9.3 EXCEPT AS EXPRESSLY WARRANTED, LICENSOR DOES NOT WARRANT TIIAT COPIES OF TilE SOFTWARE OiliER THAN THOSE PROVIDED flY THE LICENSOR SHALL PROVIDE FUNCTIONAL INTEGRITY. LICENSOR DISCLAIMS ALL OllLIGATIONS AND LIAfliLITJES ON TilE PARI OF LICENSOR FOR DAMAGE, INCLUDING, flUT NOT LIMITED TO, SPECIAL, INDIRECT, AND CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, ATTORNEYS' AND EXPERTS' FEES ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITU TilE USE OF TilE SOFTWARE LICENSED UNDER TillS AGREEMENT.

9.4 Licensor warmnts that the Program docs not infringe the copyrights of any other party.

9.5 Anything to the contra!)· notwithst:mding, Licensor and Licensee agree that the ma,imum aggregate amount of money damages for which Licensor may be liable to Licensee under this Agreement. resulting from any cause whatsoever, shall not e"cccd the total amount of fees received by Licensor from Licensee.

10. GENERAL PROVISIONS 10.1 This Agreement shall be governed by the Jaws of the st:ltc of California. I 0.2 Licensee may not assign, sell, pledge, or sublicense the Program or any rights granted

under this Agreement without Licensor's wriucn consent. I 0.3 This Agreement constitulcs the entire Agreement of the parties on the subject matter of

this Agreement and supersedes all prior agreements and underst:lndings which may have existed between Licensor and Licensee. Any amendment or modification to this Agreement must be in a writing signed by both parties.

I 0.4 No waiver of any brc.ach of this Agreement shall constitute a waiver of a subsequent breach.

10.5 If any provision of this Agreement is held invalid or unenforceable, the remaining provisions shall nevertheless remain valid.

AGREED to this ___ day of --------• 19 __ .

PIRCO,lNC.

By ________________ __

President/Licensor

Licensee

3i


The PLACE Horse

In-The-Iv1 one y At EXPO '90 the great advocates of Speed, (final Time) handicapping,

Andy Beyer, Steve Davidowitz and Len Ragozin, berroaned the fact that

there were fewer overlays for them, especially at Eastern Tracks.

This, they said (quite accurately) was because the public had "caught

up"' with their speed handicapping techniques.

Since the north American handicapper has an acute case of first-itis,

what I call the Hertz complex, they are virtually ignoring the value

that still exists in Place and Show. Mitchell and Ziemba have helped

to destroy PLACE & SHeW OVERLAYS for the FAVORITES. Virtually ignored)

are the NON-FAVORITE contenders who have NO chance of Winning but who

constitute, in OUR Methodology, DESIGNATED Place/Show horses.

Esser1tial Axion1 The contender second

most lih::ely to W1N is NOT

tl1e conter1der most lil{ely to PLACE!

(Except 28°/o of the tiine)* ·*North An1e1ica11 Tracl{

. 1: year average .

.32.


1: High Class MEDIOCRE PACE

Horses with class levels (APV) that exceed best in the field

by as much as 25% are prime candidates in this catagory

2: Low Class OUTSTANDING PACE

... are the other side of this very important catagory. Seek pace standouts from lower class or APV levels,

andJor from lower class tracks. They have a lo\v win potential

but often PLACE.

33


3 : CONTENDERS WITH PRONOUNCED

2ND ITIS Look at the Earnings box.

A dearth of wins but a bevy of 2nds and 3rds ... This is the tip off LOOK for horses that closely follow winning horses.

4: THE TOP CONSENSUS HORSE

Better still, a consensus Best Bet.

Tl1ese animals only win about 42o/o of the time ..

BUT PLACE 68% of the time!


5: THE CONTRA ENERGY CONTENDER

Perhaps the MOST important of all factors.

At Early Pace Traclts the horse in the top 4

with the best Sustained Pace.

At Sustained tracks, a top 4 horse witl1 the best Early

6: THE EXTREME CONTRA ENERGY

CONTENDER whose percentage of Early Energy defies

both the WIN & PLACE

energy parameters.


7: The BIG WIN Last ... or an easy

(relatively uncontested wi11) last out.

Where today's matchup projects 1nore early competition.

These horses seldom repeat but frequently PLACE.

8: A maiden winner last + race who won at a PURSE level

equal to or HIGHER than TODAY'S Purse

This is a lor'lgshot win poter1tial tl1at places with

amazing freque11cy.


9 : The MORNING LINE Favorite

Regardless of its Post Positio11s, Odds

or· it Ranlcing on your readouts · this horse must be carefully

exami11ed to learn WHY it earned its status. A frequent Placer.

10: KEEP A PLACE MODEL

This is of PRIME IMPORTANCE. Your Place Model should

include all pertinent factors including the

9 preveiously outlined.


The co1nbination of Factor X and

Hidden Energy provides a drainatic ne\v procedure for

isolating Exacta/Quinella contention as \veil a general contention

elin1inator

Phase III Users do the saine for

your ADJUSTED fractional readouts.

ENERGY! users n1erely AVERAGE

your FX+I-IE/2 rankings.

VVhen ties appear, use actual nurnbers.

In Synergisn1 n1erely add the au to adjusted 2nd and 3rd fraction-

Divide by 2-No\v add Factor X.

The results \viii produce the

Exacta/Quinella box in the top 3 IF you've

entered the proper 5 contenders fron1

predictive pace lines.


My Personal Procedure

Doc Sartin ....

MY PERSONAL SYSTEM OF MONEY MANAGEMENT

This article comes at the request of Dr. Alex Milstein, a client and a

renor~ned psychiatrist who, in my estimation, stands head and shoulders

above his psychiatric peers. Alex asser-ts that over the years he has

never·found me incorrect in my stands against mainstream handicapping

dictum's. In the area of money management he cites the 60/40 dutch as

one example.

My own money management system (at last a chance to use that word)

does not in any way preclude the viability of the ones published by

Dick Schmidt or of the master, Huey Mahl. Actually it is a

personalized version of their edicts. It is tailored for the person

who cannot 1-1ager on a daily basis because of other commitments, AND on

the presumption that one has mastered the skills as presented in our

manual, "The 55.:'. Solution." In short, the a bill ty to -isolate place and

show contenders.

STEP 1: Determine exactly hoH much you are going to put through mutuels on any ONE GIVEN DAY.

STEP 2: Divide that amount in half. One half is 1-1agered on TWO win selections

STEP 4: With my other $200 I look for In-The-Money and Exotic opportunities based ON TOTE BOARD ODDS. In appropriate circumstance I ..:ill even add to an already placed WIN BETS based on higher odds or, bet a THIRD 'horse to rdn if the odds make it profitable. Sometimes I even use suspicious TOTE BOARD fluctuations as criteria. Mostly, however, the $200 is wagered in Place or Show ..:hen I see a DESIGNATED place or sho...: horse (557. Solution) with profitable tote board odds. This includes some Exactas and in Nevada, almost al...:ays, the Qulnella.

The result is I usually make as much profit with the Alternate $200 bank as with the strictly WIN Bank. The second bank also sustains me on those days ..:hen I enjoy a paucity of ~--tlnners. I will al...:ays back any pre-made ..:in bet ...:ith a subsequent Place wager if the WIN odds become 9/2 or better. Over 5 to one I will further back the horse to sho...:. My rJIN, PLACE SHOrJ bet ration is 1-2-4. In other words for every four dollars wagered to win I bet $8 to Place and $16 to Show; but ONLY when the odds dictate profitability.

While my goal is to make a profit equal to my wagering total, I do not

always succeed because I have imposed a somewhat unrealls tic goal.

However, a 1007. profit is reached often enough to make the procedure

ideal for ME. It has yet to have a LOSING DAY. The Horst case scenario

was a 227. pr_ofit. However, It has had days when the profit reached as

high as 300~

To those who can Hager on a fairly regular basis I recommend the KELLY

CRITERION Hi th the 60/40 Win dutch. I also urge everyone to examine

the profit potential in Place Wagering. I am reminded of the story of

the renowned "Chicago O'Brien, a handicapper from the 1930's to 1950.

He earned a documented TEN MILLION DOLLARS from race horse wagering.

O'Brien's formula was: "Figure them to win, BET them to place".

40


Porilolio Po\ver

Buried in our original manuals is our· initial reference to PLACE & SHOW Wagering and some advice on handling those outstanding numerical 3rd Choice horses. I quote:

"Proper use of this liethodology ~-Jill produce an inordinately large !'umber of PLACE & SHOW MUTUELS. On an average this method produces FIVE horses per· 20 races that pay in excess of g to 1. Some just miss the 1-1in and pr-oduce PLACE prices of from 6 to 12 dollars Hith regular! ty. Each 20 races •~e also see a bevy of SHOW prices in excess of $4.00. Clients 1-1ho bet WH1 ONLY are faced the heartbreak of missing out on horse paying from 12 to 20 dollars to PLACE and 9.40 to SHOW. Therefore, we suggest that 1-1hen one of your top two selections is going off at 9-2 or better that you back it up to Place & Show 1-1ith a wager from a SEPARATE alternate bank.

OFTEN a close NUMERICAL THIRD CHOICE

To me, VJ..LUE, like boauty, !!ell in tht> oye:~ of the-b~h-;;ldor. 1 t b the crux of every-thing \le l.Juy, soil, or bar·galn for ln our everyday 11 vel!!. But, 1 f \10 novor put our finger on it and def_!~ the damn tldtlg \Ill could never gel anything dono!

So, it 1!! the e~!J._~~ or B!I!IO!I!Iod vorth of 11oro6tldng. \./hen the 1 tern ~~.;::;-va i~irlg 1~ a ~~~ entity made up of !!lyle, materials and labor, >~e can give lt a valuation--or at lea:~l a:s:~e:~:~ the price or demand for il11 replacement, etc.

In the gambling vorld, 'IJhere 'IJe barter- for opinion only, value take:s on a more nebu-lou:s or ab:~tract quality. Opinion ha:~ value, but of 11hat dimen:lion:~ i:s open to conjecture before the fact. llo11ever, after the fact, if the outcome io !!UCco~~ful any valuo 1!! 11elcomed. ~e all t~ to a:sse9:~ value in :~uch a manner. that >~e ·mtnlmizo tho inevitable lo!I!IO!! knoving full vel! ve'll never be 100% vin proflcient."Value• as u:~ed in-gambling term:~ ha:s it'll --;;-;t::~ ln the~ betting phenomenon. That 1:5, ln the compari:~on of ~~ option:s--team A or team B. The original pn,rol:sl!l i:s a 50/50 outcome or "pick". But a:~ 11e gain informa-tion as to the t11o team~' projecled perfor-mance nature, 11e develop a leaning to one 11ide or the other, Thu!l, bro11nle polnl11 taken from one ~ide iB added to the olher, etc.

From thi~ ~c c!!timate a rl~k line and bar-ter accordingly. Only h(;tory of ltlany ~uch ri:~k a::~5es:Jmonl!! ~ill te 11 u~ 1£ over a 11 ve are !lUcce:J:Jful and maintain a po!!itive

·expectancy. But even in tvo-11ldod affair~ ~e kno~ tho peril!! of tnl11concept.lon, and it ain't a! eaay a:s it look!!!. Con:soquently, ve continually que::~tion and !Ubject to !Cru-tiny our evaluation procl!ldurell.

Ho11 you can ::~ee 11hcn lie get to !"'_Ult.lp).!!_ entrant:~ in tllB :Jnme conte:~t a~ 11 llh ho~ing, lie compound our dilemma. Our o::~timatlon::~ of ri:~k can be quite riddled 11ilh error bocau5e of BO many entrant::~ and con!lidering the availability and lime lo use valid information in a5ae3sing ri:Jk relaUonsldp!!.

42

lit l rJaot the tn1ck or program line-maker ha:~ a much ea::dor cut ta!lk in ovolving hi::l :o-cnlled nornlng Line. ll:s an initial ba:sl::~ he can or·iginale a "loo::1e" line basod :~lrlctly on the relative merfu of the conlom.lor:~, but thereafter hi!! line 1:l modified a:~ he li8.nd1~~ the g_BJnblerol lie tries to ant.lcipate the clo!llllg odd9.

1-Jhat 11111 the people go for7 After all. hi:!! llne ill only supposed to emulate 11hal he con:siderll the belling patterns of tho public. It':~ eurprising ho~ well he doe~, or 1~ the public, overlay and underlay con!lcioull a!! they try to hammer tho line in !!Uch a manner to make a prophet out of hiro? I I any va 1 ue 1111::1 intended, it can be dl:~torled. It 1::1 more of a public pul~o per-copUon.

t1y good !r.!end, the innovative, illus-trlou!!, and outepoken Dr. l!o11ard G. Sartin,. gate hill ire up ~hen sport!! refug~.;~;s bring forth the "value" concept into. the race tracks. lie'!! 1.

2 to one, then t/1csc t~ro l1orscs s/Jould L>e di.sctJnlcri in (tJvor of t!Jc next lrro clJoiccs ~

it is their pea thot deteri-Jines t/Jclr 1 inc ond HOT some objective motllernoticol {or·m\1-lo. Hence, the Selection, Hot the lJECJS}()H

•fllctorJ still dominlltes tiJelr ultlmotc lt'(Jgerlng cholce(s).

Once llgt:dn the "'aster, lluey Hahl, steps in to solve t/Je problem. 1/tJey hos clevelopc

PLACE BETTING

'!.·.-·.1":D..l..tt..:-u::..u..t.llln·.·-~~-.1.~~~..-"--------------------------.J

ln t-Jte U.S., Plnce b?ls nre 11\-:lde to ly one of tJ1e rrost over looked prcp::>:;il l t)IJS by m;:uty he;wy p._Jnsters, ilS tJ 1ey Ill.:!}' cons idcr such a ~o:ager

- . ·r-' . - --

will share the pcol with. Like a 5/2 (Win cdds) horse can pay anywilt?re in the range of, say, SJ.OO to $5.80 (to Place) de[:>2n::ling en who crosses the wire with him. Rem::mber the Pcol pie isn't dividro equally until after the =t of all the winning tickets are deducted first. '

There are hard-held cunputer pr~r-am.9 1 char-ts, tables, r.:::rro:Jrams 1 etc., many of which I've derived, to he 1 p one ascer-tain in the pre:::ious few nr::mcnts before p:JSt time e 1 tlJer U1e !Llnge or minirrun pdce or cxUs a horse rnay ruY. !Jo..le_yer, one ~.:o,Jld need v ie,.;ing a=ess to the th:! Place pcol arxl horse pots en U1e totalizator-.

If. you are a long-time "grinder" like me, without general access to the tote, I've found the 40% Place Extension (off of win c:d::ls) will average out over many plays. Sc:met.ifres you're d lsafPOi nted ard ot11er times elated over U1e [)c>yoffs. But I 1Ve fOJ.nd any money managem211t bet-sizing strategies \./ill seek a gcxxl running aver-age a,er time.

At m.'Vly tracks, we see U1e Favor-ites win a.bout 32% or- so of all races. It a in 1 t enough to gain a Kelly, /l.dvantage considering the average pa yof fa, and you might firx:l yourself bJcldng an overall loss of aro.m:l 20% which correspc.ods with the t:.ruck take and breakage.

en the other- hand, overall, favor-ites to Place hit over 50% of U~e ti~. I've taken their average payoffs over 1000's of plays (ignodng small fieJd.s.ard cdJs-cn Win cdds) an:::l fa...uxl t11at, collectively, t11ey return about 95¢ on the dollar. 'Ihat 's ~ race. 'Ibis sho,.,s a ne

To 11\C, I like to see tl1e Plnce bet, if used, to I::€ a potential earner in it's o,.;n right. 11lUs, a few years ngo, I developed a table (bused on e.xtensi(!;]S) when? yOJ dutdw;:rl a sl.J5!£ horse e

Ho~ever, to get a~ay from fractional unit~. and perceive the relationships in \./hole number~. many convert probabilitle~ a~ a percent of 1. Thb only entailed moving the decimal t~o place~ to the right (x 100). This more common expression is no\.1 "\ chance" of success or failure. Thus, .60 probabi 1 ily b a 60% chance of success. etc. \./in and lo~s proflclencle!! are handled like~ise.

In handicapping a graded line (like the track linemaker last \.leek), \.le a~sign points quantitatively (not rar.kinj). :'~rcentages are thus establish~d on th~ ... ~!vidual hor~e' ~ relationship to tho total. ll handicapper J.Jho assesse~ by t:1eri t only (a~ he should) then ha~ a so-calle-d "true-rbk'' line as far as he'~ concerned. This is unlike the Morning Line 1.1hich is more like the measure of the public pulse.

The "tru~ risk" line pays no attention to the odds board except \./hen the bettor com-pare8 for overlay;underlay comparisons and a betjno-bet decision. ~hen you handicap a horse'~ "chances", you might say h~ has a S0/50\ chance of \./inning. That means, if faced \.lith the ~ame conditions as today'5 race., he should 1.1in 5 out of 10 of ·~m, or about 1/2 the time.

Ho\.1 the !lorning Line, or Sv~ep, might grade him at 8/5 odd~, or the tole board might bot him do>tn to 3/5, etc. But neither should alter your original 50% assessment. The tote odd:~ may only be recognized far a comparison of overlay or underlay statu~. Whenever the payoff has a positive expec-tancy over the risk or true chance of success, these are value plays. Hat ural! y, if the tote also promises a 1/1 payoff, then both your odds are equivalent and no advantage or disadvantage lie~ either >~ay. lleverthele!!~, it'!! coincidental './hen they coincide!

To this end, people 1.1ho handicap do>ln to probabilities (\), may also wish to gel a gra:~p on \/hat th~ir chance~ may be, a:~ 1.1ell, betting into the secondary pool5 of Place or Show. These assessments are com-p-r;xbecau;;c;ne i~ confronted 1.11 th the !lo-cal led "chance:~" of the other horses they must share the pool with a:~ \./ell as the size of the field. · -------ShoJ.Jn !or the first time, I have developed a table stJO'.Iing an overall averag~ of one':~ chances based upon a 8-9 horse field. These J.Jere initia1ly empirical trial-and-error derivations taken over an extremely \./ide sampling. Be a1.1are no1.1, these have nothing to do 1.1llh mutuel payoffs, but are a gauge to their probable occurrence based strictly on your handicapping assessment.

Thu~. if your 50\ \.lin-chance horse b in a 9-hor:~e field, then 1.1e are pretty \./ell a:Jsured his chances to Place are about 71\. Likewi:~G, about an 83% chance of Sllo1.1ing (or about 5 ortt of 6 races). Armed 1.1lth these chance occurrence~. then one can determine 1.1llatever the public 1.11ll let you collect on a 1.1lnning ticket in that parti-cular pool, and effect a bet;no-bet decision.

The size of field is an important consi-d~ration. If it is a 14-horse field as L~unll i~ prone to run, then obviously the s(lco:1tlary pools mu:.~t be slladetl proportlon-nlely ln"lfl. (ln thn ollr..,r lonrul. ll!! u,.., flolu ul;ninlslles in :~ize. the lJercent chance to Place and Sho1.1 are enhanced.

Obviously, ln a 2-hor-se !leld lhe chance of Placing 1~ 100%, but lhen, of course, there 1.1ould be no betting, etc. Generally, as the field :~ize dimini:lhes from the 8-9 horse base, as a rule of thumb you can generally go up a percent or t1.1o ~ horse (in \:.he race) on the secondary pool hor~es, etc.

So, as you can see, if you like a horse \./ell enough, it isn't too hard to see hi~ excellent chances of being "in-the-money"--especially in the Place ~lot. ~hen a dedi-cated horseplayer· overcomes hi~ initial :~ense of greed, he may see the virtue and the overall security and level of confi-dence nf se 1 ecUng choice candidates to Place. You don't " 1.1.1nys have to go for the )ugu!ar!

This chart may enlighten you on the real prospect of your chances. We 1.1ill elaborate on the more solid type "investment" approaches in future articles. It is the appropriate alternate approach for those \./ho \.llsh to stay IJilhthe racing game, but have been burnt out on the pie-in-the-sky exotic~. You can't make a living on a pre~ dlctable basis \./Idle fostering the "I ot tery-type" menta I lty--small investment,

·big payoff!!


TRUE-RISK PERCE/IT Hill .----. Cl!l\IICE-

ODDS Hill PLTICE S!IOH

TRUE-RISK PERCENT CHANCE WIN .--. ;-

ODDS 'r/IN PLACE SHOW

1(9--) 90.0 95.7 97.8 89.0 95.3 97.6 88.0 91.8 97.3 87.0 94.4 97. 1 86.0 93.9 96.8 85.0 93.4 96.6 84.0 92.9 96.3

1/5--) tl3.0 92.4 96.1 82.0 91.9 95.8 81.0 91.4 95.5 80.0 90.9 95.2 79.0 90.1 95.0 78.0 89.9 91.7 77.0 89.3 94.4

115.0 67.2 80 : 46.0 68.0 01.0

9/2--) 19.0 37.0 54.0 18.0 35.4 52.3

5--) 17.0 33.9 50.6 16.0 32.3 48.8 15.0 30.6 46.9

6--> 14.0 28.9 44.9

7--> 13.0 27.2 42.8 12.0 25.4 40.5

0--) 11.0 7.3.6 30.2 lU.O 2 1 . '1 35.7

10--) 9.0 1 9. 8 3 3. 1

12--> 0.0 17.9 30.3 7.0 15.8 27.3

15--) 6.0 13.8 21.2

20--) 5.0 11.6 20.8

30--) 4.0 9 .40 17 .. 2 3.0 7.20 13.4

so--> 2.0 4.90 9.30 99--> 1. 0 2.50 4.80


---------

fll111 No longer was man content to try to pick the winner of a race for its just re~ards, but he reasoned if he someho~ increased his risk, and selected the 5~cond horse as well, as tho first, then hi!l re~ards should be greater. 1t became a type of parlay on a single race.

don't quite know the derivation of the exotic-multiple, t~o-horse 1.1ager, and I'm too lazy to research it. My gut feeling tells me that the ''Quinella" derived from the Jal alai games from it's seemingly Spanish sound. The Greyhounds ~ere quick to adopt it, and it greatly heightened inter-est in the the t11o sports. In fact, in either, today the \.1-P-S pools have almost reached an insignificant perceritag~ of the handle in public play. Also, in either sport, attempts at handicapping are too often tll\~arted by the fickleness of random-ness, of unknown factors in these event!!, and they have drifted into a "numbers" game. The "lottery" mentality prevalls--a lot for a little!

Tracks and fronlons pre£ erred Ud s type exotic over the Daily Double, as the money didn't iemain dormant, and could be churned after every race givl ng them rnore pool pies to bite into for their tasty "take" and breakage income.

Picking the first t11o entrants to eros!! the \lire (1st and 2nd), in either order, 5cem~ deceptively simple, which, in turn, fo~tered 1 t.s popular-! ly. In an event of 8 en-trants, there are only 28 po~~ible Qulnella combinations. That's 3-l/2 time!! more po!!-sibilities than selecting a single horse to \/ln. /Ill thing5 being equal, in a long-run average of Qulnolla number wins, that's al:;o about the size increase of the mutuel payoff. It is much more attractive, even though the increa~ed risk doe!! not !learn to be that much greater.

On page 32-15 of last week's L.V. 1\ol.l_,-letter, we depicted the "chances" of scor-ing in the secondnry pool;-ba;;d on yo11r a:~sossmont of tho wln pr·ot.>abll1ties. Shown

49

FIRST TWO HORSES

Pt. I herein, we !lho~ an adjusted and abbreviated form of that tnble restricted to ~-P and the "true-ri.~k" odds.

TRUE-RISK % Ctil~NCE ODDS WIN PLACE 1/9_ ------> 90.0 95.7 1/5 ------> 83.3 92.3 2/5 ------> 71.4 86.2 1/2 ------> "66.7 83.3 3/5 ------>.~6~2~--5~~8~0~·~6 __ , 4/5 ------) 55.6 75.8 1/1 ------> 50.0 74.4 6/5 ------> 45.5 67.6 7 I s· - - - - - - > 4 1 • 7 6 4 • 7 3/2 ------> 10.0 62,5 o/5 ------> 38.5 61. o 9/5 ------> 35.7 58.1 2/1 ------> 33.3 55.6 5/2 ------) 28.6 50.0 3/1 ------> 25.0 45.5 7/2 ------> 22.2 41.7

4 ------> 20.0 38.5 9/2 ------> 18.2 35.7

5 ------> 16 7 33 3 . . G ------> 14.3 29.4 7 ------> 12.5 26.3 8 ------> 11.1 23.8

10 ------> 9.1 20.0 12 ------> 7.7 17.2 1 5 __ - _-_-_-_-_-_>_, 6 • 3 1 4 • 3 20 ------> 4.8 11.1\ 25 ------> 3.9 9.1 30 ------> 3.2 7.7 50 ------> 2.0 4.8 99 ------> 1.0 2.5


Of all \lagering mode~. I con~ider the ~in Dutch the best by far. 11ost pros, the guys ~make their living at the track (very fe1.1, actually) can attribute their ~uccess to the fact that they have finally accepted thie wagering ~ode.

·for the life of me, I can't undentand the reluctance (to at least try) by the . major-ity of otherviee astute handicappers. N~erous times, I've taken the "l.lorkout• eheete of players, \llth a good trial sample and shown them, by employing the proper clutching principles and an optimal money management program (it'e all in Instruction Sheet C), where they can grind out good profit~--consietently.

I guess greed has a lot to do 1o1ith it. Too many 5el hung up on the exotics--the big score--a lot for a little, e,t.c. I call it the "lottery" mentality. Don't get me \lrong, 1 play the!l too--but not !leriou~ly-tha risk factor precludes any semblance of "careful planning". Take a fling, have something going on the side--but it'e the day-to-day, bread and butter betting, acti-vity that \/ill carry you--and finance those "flings". ·

I'm periodically retained as 'a consultant to eel up definitive betting plans for a gambling syndicate here in La~ Vega~. Two guy' run the 'how, and they have about half a dozen agente circulating around the books ~ith phones, beepers, and \lhalnot. They play sporting event!!, year around, and catch the "!hift!", the line ~ovement8 !or •!!idee" and "middle'"• etc. ~nd they do well--but, ironically, their real love ill the bone 11. --.-These dutie~. they allocate lo their vives who each spend 2-4 houre a day in a couple of major booke. They follo\1 guidelines to a "C", and average $200-$300 per day pro£1 t each ~· Their only \lagering mode--~in Dutchingll They U5e the •J" (lnstructfOn Sheet) card, and proportional bel (Instruc-tion Sheet C), exclu!!lvelyl What belter e~doreement can you have?

Eo

FIRST· TWO-. HORSES Part IV

They ~ave a. Sartin guy in NYC calling them a co~ple hor!!e!! per race for about 3-7 race~ a day for NY and HJ tra.cke. They cut him in for 20% on an agreed-upon mini~un per race--so the incentives are there for ev6rypody. The Sa.rlin guy ie a eub!!criber and ueee L.V. for contender i!!olation on the oompuler. He'B deadly on catching !!hip-pore at a. price. I like one of the ~lves too, as she keep!! losing her "J" . dutching card II

b~ped lntQ her at the Hilton Superbook the other day, and 11he said she ju!!t clear-ed an $600 dividend. She does that 2 or 3 time~ a week. Their dividend level is 40% (T=l.~). Their Control banrxoll base i! $2,000 but !!he !lay!! she never start!! a day vith ~ore than $1,000 on ber, and most of that ie unca!!bed ticket!!.

The race I \latched, she had a play on 9/5 and ~/1 !hot hor!es. Her total bet \laB $200 (10% of BR), and h~r dutch ratio ~ae 65\-35\, re~peclively. Thie called for $130 Win bet on the favorite and $70 on the other. Had the odde been eome1.1hat representative of 1o1h4l you coneidered the true-ri!k chance odd~ of the horse! in the race, you'd be looking at this from our "chance" table (L.V. l33 & 34).

9/5

1/1

She lu\d her girl friend \lith her· (!!he give!! her ~ fancy lunch and fe\1 bucke), and eo ~he p~l $100 on the favorite at one ~indo~, and her girl friend put $50 to \lin on the olher nt different \Iindow~ \/hen the race fint. opened,

To~ar4s poet-ti~, they both \lent back and bet the "change• and would ~e any adju~taent! !hould the odd8 ratio change. The 1/1


Remember no\./, those odds sho~:n before their counterparts (% chances) are the "true-risk" odds you handicap as a horse's real life chances as best you can figure. They have nothing to do \.lith the Morning Line, or the tole odds unless by sheer coinci-dence.

Let's say, in your handicapping you see a horses' chances as being about 25% to 1-1in (3/1 odds). That means he 1-1ould probably 1-1in about 5 out of 20 such similar races, The other 15 he \.lould not be in the \./in-ner's circle. \.le also see by the table that he would offer at least a Place mutuel about 45% of the time, or 9 out of 20 ~uch races. So that mean!! that 4 more times he \.louldn't \.lin, but \.lould Place only. The other 11 time!! out of 20 (55%) he 1-1ould lose or be out of the \.1-P payoffs. Graphi-cally it \.lould look like this:

0 5 9 20 3/1

So be it for a single 3/1 horse. Ue could similarly chart all the other \.ijP ratios of other oddB horBes, etc. This leade to !!lome interesting graphic analysis.

Let's talk about 2 horsos in any race. Each run independently of one another, yet only one can \.lin (barring dead-heals). llo\.lever, both can Place in the same race (of course one or the other \.lould \.lin in this case).

Let's assume, \.le also have (true risk odds) horse in the Naturally, he also has a 25%

anotl1er 3/1 same race.

chance of

Sl

Hinning. llo~o~ever, he cannot 1-1in other horse does, and vice versa.

\./hen the

B 25% 50% 25%

So, if >~e combine the t>~o hor~e:!! \/here only ono can \.lin 1-1hen the other lose5, J.~e Bee that together, one or the other \lould \.lin the rae e 5(}% of the U me (2 5+2 5:50) , Of course \.le a~still assuming 3/1 true ri!!k odds on both 'A and B horses. -- --

This also means, that in this race, neither of the l\.lo \.lould J.~in 50% of the time. Ho\.1-ever, individually each horse \.lould be out of the ~-P money 55% overall (100-45=55), If thi~ be the case, then neither J.~ould Win or Place about 30% of the time (.55 x .55 =.3025).

Nov \.le can begin to see how any t\.lo slack up \.lith one another 1.1hen ve combine their efforts in one race.

horses try to

The t\.lo-horse betting activities we'll examine in detail next \.leek (#34) vill be:

\.'-P Exacta W-P;P-H Quinella \.'-~ Dutch W-P Dutch P-P Dutch

The risk and yields vary greatly bet1.1een them, and we'll examine which is most ad-vantageous depending on your style of play.


horee won by a neck, eo ~he cle~ed about $175 on that one. They ~ere cal•, didn't ecrea~ or hollar or run to the ca~hier'e ~indo~. The next day they ~ere going lo another book--c

up in the fever of the circu~ atmo~phere of the track, 1 t quickly erode!!, and they W.e a hiatu~ \:.o flirt ~lth Ladr Greed! (A ~~~ter to Lady Luck!)

Becau!le, for mo~t. there i!! a dearth of con~ocutive lo!!o

tom brohamer enea·gy! directed by hat brudsha · let us know exactly what you want to cover during...

Documents