Coming from someone who finds a lot of men to be exciting.

First my priest at the Catholic school growing up never diddled me ... now this.

Hey, Doug- it's really good and a really, really good idea. That said, a few thoughts for going forward-

MMSC is right; if you can, you should put yourself on video. Two reasons:

1. Video is a visual medium, and something active (a person talking) is good to break up the many static shots-racing forms, still photos, which are very useful and have a place in this, but need some visual motion to break it up a bit.
2. You are young. For the pieces on handicapping tips and techniques, this is a huge plus, as one of the things racing is always grousing about is needing to attract more young bettors. Your youth makes handicapping a race seem accessible to a younger audience.

If you're not going to video yourself, I would still suggest sitting up or standing up to do the voice recording. It gives your voice a bit more energy and focus. You took a little while to warm up, vocally- your voice was very confident and assured a few minutes in to the piece. Bring that quality to the first few minutes of your next video. Sitting up or standing up helps energize your voice from the start.

On a content level, as a novice handicapper viewing it, I would have liked some explanation of why speed duels setting up races for lesser horses are useful. Is it going forward knowing not to bet the winning horse back? Is it a toss out when analyzing a losing horse's race later? Is there a way to recognize when one might happen ahead of time? Since the entire goal of handicapping is to win money, how does being able to recognize a speed duel help when placing a wager?

Also, maybe a line or two explaining the whys- like, why is a speed duel bad? Why is it a fallacy that a horse loose on the lead would run faster if challenged? Hey, that could a fun segment- handicapping myths.

And time-wise, I would suggest keeping them under ten minutes, or even under eight if you can. When you're famous and have your handicapping show on ESPN, you can do 22-minute shows, but the internet is a different beast.

These are just suggestions for improving the look going forward. I really, really hope you continue. You're such a good writer, and are able to explain so clearly what happens in a race- you really could get a wider audience with what you're doing. That said, I'll totally watch them, even if you don't change a thing.

This is great stuff, Doug. I liked how you tied historical to contemporary examples. I hope you'll continue to produce these. Good promotional value to you, and educational for me.

Enjoyed the video. Looking forward to more

Here's todays feel-out segment.

Races from across the country -- this is more bread and butter work geared toward betting with a lot of cheaper class racing.

I put about 60 to 100 horses a week in stable watches when I'm going full out. Basically just pick a horse I added or had in from each region and talk about a race of his.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yDLzo...XsRxfkWmkglr5i


I left a real wordy chart text up for a minute and a half just to annoy My Miss Storm Cat. The video editing came out beyond terrible and this was a freaking pain in the ass because of it.

Going to have to get better software so I can do this faster and the final product doesn't look horrible -- or I might as well not even bother.

what video editing software are you using?

Oh geez, you even left the stupid watermark on it.

I sometimes need these reminders to recall how retahded you can be.

What makes you so sure it's water?...............................:rolleyes:

EW! :eek:

I'm guessing a non-activated version of avs4you?

Yes -- sadly I had no other software that would allow me to copy the replays from the ADW websites.

Learn even a LITTLE f'n french.

Raison D'Etat's name should hardly be difficult to pronounce.

Good one, better than your first effort although buy the damn video editing license.

I hope you plan on doing analysis of the sales this spring.

I did him just so I could give a shout out to Sightseek. I couldn't pass English, forget French.

You totally botched his race anyway, so I guess not knowing how to pronounce his name is secondary.

Maybe, we will see.

It's not a future tense thing. To discuss that race without putting it in context to the rest of that day is to botch it. You're a very smart guy, who really understands the game, so surely you understand this.

I'm not sure how you could take much positive out of that last race for Raison D'Etat. In any case, he'll still be overbet.

Thank you for that. I am honored.

I really liked this one a lot (text aside).

Two things... one is don't even say you might not bother anymore and two...

You need to reread this and listen to her cause it is dead on.

(Oh and last thing can I just say I am saddened to have missed Mr. Rare Bog Esquire)?

Nothing against you cause what is said between you two is none of my business but my heart jumped when I saw that name. :D

Okay read this again NOW!

So the question is are you serious about this or not?

Do you want to build an audience or not?

If you do really... you need to listen to people who are giving you advice.

At least think about it cause we wouldn't waste our time if we didn't believe in you.

I thought he got a very, very poor ride. I also thought the track was inside-speed friendly.

There are others on that circuit who've run recently that I'm a lot more interested in, but I will quite likely be betting him next time.

One of the draw-backs of taking the approach of trying to follow so many circuits -- and dealing with so many races a week to review and so many to bet -- is that you aren't as on top of every detail as you would be if you grounded yourself to one or two circuits.

By all means correct my errors. You're more on top of that circuit than I am with the approach I've switched to.