The biggest obstacle in playing Paul's Hope was simply being able to play a horse trained by Hector Palma.Best I can tell,Palma won 1 maiden claiming race in 47 attempts in 2006-2007(2%.)People can b.s. all they want,but this would of had to be a spread race for you(and you would have to include him in a spread.)Talking endlessly (about this rat) is the punishment deemed upon us by one Corey Nakatani.His horse broke great ,but he took back,and Espinoza said thank you,thank you,and set a comfortable 22'1,and a 45'3(as Gryder's horse collapses while keeping Nakatani down inside.) Corey is just not riding with confidence,and Espinoza is.I have no doubt that if you swap riders,Peace Accord presses that horse,and draws off.Nakatani is giving a workman-like 90% effort out there,and when somebody is riding well,you will have trouble running them down(if you wait while they coast on 22'1 ,45'3.)If somebody else gets this mount,you will see this.The horse will either press,or make a big middle move.The new rider will not wait until the stretch to move(while somebody else has fun coasting up front.)

Thank you to the people who posted what they saw in Paul's Hope.

With all due respect its easy to analyze a race after its over. There are very few horses that win that you cant write an essay of why you could have used him or her after the fact. Pretty much useless info now unless you have a working time machine.

GANDER,I want to know how(on a $100 ticket)Barry Abrams got to the final leg with that Highly Gallant's effort determining whether he gets 97k.That's what I want to know.If he zigs instead of zags,then the man has 405k for $100.

If he was real high on Moogie then a 5X1X5X1X2X1 ticket wouldn't seem all that implausible to come up with the winners. He also could have gone 2 deep in the second leg and singled Singalong in the 7th.

Yes, but...
 

It's easier after the fact for sure, but I wouldn't take away from the due diligence put in by those that came up with that horse in their tickets... I mean, the selections are out there for all to see... nobody singled him as far as I know. I included him with 4 others because I thought he was live. And, as BTW said, one of the keys to play multi-race wagers is figuring out where you have definite opinions of how a race will turn out and also figuring out where you will do well just to survive. IMO, this was one of the latter.

For those that wanted the rationale behind selecting Paul's Hope, they got it....there were many reasons to not take the horse but I felt the reasons to include him were compelling enough.

Maybe so, but it is always helpful when you are trying to learn to hear and/or read from as many people as possible. We're all going to view things differently and if someone brings up a point that I had missed, I'll try to keep that in my mind when handicapping in the future.

Fair enough but if you are building $2,000 tickets, there is plenty of room to include horses like Pauls Hope. Its one thing playing in a make believe contest with monopoly money, but its quite another to play a ticket using your own real money (not being backed by a man with deep pockets).

I could easily get on here and give 3 reasons why I loved and profited from a Mark Shuman horse on Saturday at Laurel, but the fact that I didnt post it before the race negates any reason for posting it now.

There is this guy I hang with at the track who I love dearly, but who has this annoying habit of coming up to me after every race that produces a tough to come up with winner, and tells me why the horse should have been played. Just want you want to hear after blendering the last of your cash and about set to make the 1st of many trips to the atm machine.

GANDER,I want to know how(on a $100 ticket)Barry Abrams got to the final leg with that Highly Gallant's effort determining whether he gets 97k.That's what I want to know.If he zigs instead of zags,then the man has 405k for $100.

Ouch. I often zig when I should have zagged, so I can imagine how he feels.
I made a bad decision on Saturday at Gulfstream, one that cost me 3 grand. I used Malibu Mint instead of using Any Limit. It was a good day for me at the track because of a race at Laurel but it still stung.

I don't agree. $2000 does not go very far on a card like yesterdays and I think that was shown pretty clearly. Getting that horse on your ticket was far from easy and that was clear from the results yesterday. Perhaps if you had actually spent a few minutes trying to construct a play ( instead of writing down numbers ) you would have seen how little ground you can cover with under $2500.

I think most people took the contest very seriously and played similarly to a " real money " situation...if they had the real money to play with.

I cant imagine many people who play horses have $2,000 to spend on a pick 6ticket. Maybe if they got together with 10 other people but considering I didnt have the form and it was mid-week, there was no way I was going to take the Santa Anita carryover seriously. Perhaps if it was Aqueduct I would have made an exception but those races are just too hard out there. Pauls Hope was a very hard horse to come up with but certainly not impossible if that was a race you went 5 or 6 deep in.

I wouldnt diss the idea of writing down numbers, there was a guy I went to high school with who played a random sequence of mailbox numbers on one $2pick 6 ticket and won the whole pool (85 grand). It was at Saratoga and one of the horses who won that day was Poughkepsie Gypsie.

Looking back at what I did I made a huge error in evaluating Antifreezette as my single and then putting two other horses in as B choices in that race. By doing that I offset the purpose of singling the horse and wasted almost 2/3rds of my budget in the process. I still wouldn't have hit but would have at least had 4 out of 6. So the important lesson I take out of this is that if you want to single a horse using the A/B/C method you don't just single him as an A, you have to also use no one as a B. That is why I enjoy doing things like this with fake money.

I'm sure there were many individuals and/or syndicates that put in over $2K into yesterday's Pick-6 ( more than 250 certainly ) but yesterday's contest gave people a chance to see how they could do under those circumstances. It feels like a lot of people here took it seriously and their results bore that out.

I can totally understand you not wanting to dedicate time to this, really, but by the same token doesn't that then lessen the value of your post-Pick-6 judgements?

Wise words, my friend, wise words. I can see you got something out of this contest, which was the whole purpose of it as far as I'm concerned. The A/B/C method really stratifies your opinions better because let's say you did like 2 others in there just a little bit, you could use them as a C and maybe have 10% of your capital on them, still emphasizing your key single but just in case you have the best day of your life otherwise you have a little extra coverage there.

Now you can see why I want to put my head through a window when a horse like Appealing Zophie busts me out of a huge P6. Certainly logical but you gotta make a stand somewhere (unless you have an unlimited bankroll), sadly my strongest opinion that day was the one that cost me.

Yeah, definitely. Just by moving those two horses down from B in the 6th would have brought three horses up to my B list of which two were the winners of the last two legs. It also would have allowed me to go all in the 4th and 7th races for the C list and add Paul's Hope in the 5th along with one or two others. I still would have only had 1 A, 3 Bs, and 2 Cs win but it would have been a lot more effective use of the ticket than the $1400 I wasted on tickets using those two horses as B's in the 6th. I hope we do another one of these contests even if there aren't prizes associated. It can definitely be a learning experience.

I can totally understand you not wanting to dedicate time to this, really, but by the same token doesn't that then lessen the value of your post-Pick-6 judgements?

Absolutely. I wont respond to pick 6 talk anymore unless I play one. I have only been close to hitting 1 significant pick 6 in my life and that one didnt work out.

Now you can see why I want to put my head through a window when a horse like Appealing Zophie busts me out of a huge P6. Certainly logical but you gotta make a stand somewhere (unless you have an unlimited bankroll), sadly my strongest opinion that day was the one that cost me.

Last weekend of the meet last year at Toga if I am not mistaken. This was the horse Oracle was very high on and got a lot of people on. I was already invested in pick 4's and did not use Zophie either so I can understand how you feel. I knew this horse would be trouble when it opened up taking loads of money. :eek:

That was it... knew I just needed to get through that leg and had decent coverage in the last. Paid $65k with Appealing Zophie, no less than half that with the 2 I had (2nd and 3rd finishers).
At least it wasn't close.

I remember having a good day that particular day because I hit Hither Lane earlier in the card. But I dumped some money back on a Smoke Glacken horse Chantal Sutherland rode in the very last race. She gave that horse a dreadful ride and made a very premature wide move on the far turn.

I agree, this is how i approached the contest, and its how I think most people did. I pretended that it was my bankroll and that I really badly wanted to win it. I put in a fair amount of time as well.

I have never played this way with my own money as i am just not at that level, but it was fun to go through the motions. Frankly speaking since my normal bankroll is not large enough I do not play pick sixes. Its pointless to throw $200 to $400 dollars at it.