$5.50 for this?
 

Why do we moan on a daily basis about gas prices going to $4.00 a gallon, when we are paying $5.50 for the paper they refer to as the DAILY RACING FORM? How long ago was it just $4, and $3.50 on track? It couldn't have been that long ago. Now, don't get me wrong, I like the articles but they could be read for free (most of them anyway) online. And call me a nitpicker, but is anyone else getting tired of the insane amount of errors in this thing? What the hell is 5/16 medication? Did anyone else see that yesterday or was that just special for my FORM? Why is it that they can't get the appropriate trainer stats correct ALL THE TIME? Is it too much to ask that if a horse is running with blinkers for the first time that the trainer's stats for 1st time blinkers appear in the PP's ALL THE TIME? How about some additional improvements? Why not have the M/L next to the horses name in the PP's so I don't need to spend the 1st half an hour I sit down with the FORM transposing them from the Graded Entries? How about listing the conditions of the race on top of each page the race is associated with? Why not add somewhere if the race is 1 turn or 2 turns? Is it a secret that only the most knowledgeable horseplayer is allowed to know how many turns are in a race at all of the different racetracks throughout the country?

And finally, the CLOSER LOOK. Is it me or are these guys just mailing it in at this point? I will do my best to keep the players a secret because they may be friends of your's and I know they come on Steve's show every now and again. But the content is poor at best. Pochman is most definately the most entertaining and supplies the most useful information. But the collection behind him leave something to be desired. I used to pick on Jan Rushton because her segment on the NYRA broadcast used to consist of reading the CLOSER LOOK to the fans at the track and at home. But even she must find the content useless because I've actually seen her taking the time to gather information on her own from trainers in the paddock. Here is my latest example of the offense. I wont say who, what horse excetera, but this is pathetic.

In referencing the performance over a racing surface the writer notes that the horse's performance over this specific track was "not very strong". The horse had two races over the surface. The last time he raced over the track the horse lost his jock. The first time he ran over the surface was his 2nd lifetime race, a MSW for 2YO's, where he went off at 20-1 + odds and finished third, 4 1/2 lengths behind a horse that won a G2 stakes race the following year. Do you think this guy even took the time to look at why his record was such over the surface?

$5.50 for a newspaper that doesn't even give you what you deserve, that's offensive.

simple, don't buy it.

its filled with gold...worth it at 7.50 pay attention to this guy watchmaker..hes very good....he made big brown the favorite in the preakness.

Needs more Watchmaker.

Save the $5.50 then. or $4.50 at the track. I think the price is in line with everything else in this country. Go buy a gallon of milk, then come back and tell me you gave up milk.

Gas was 32 cents a gallon when I started driving, and I could bring a date out for less than $5.00 bucks, and come back home with $2.00.

Many other on-line PP's for a 1.00 a card.

I dunno, I buy it for the pictures. :rolleyes:

I think the point I am making is that the price of gas increases but you still get gas. The price of milk increases but you still get milk. The price of the DRF increases and while the quantity of content may have increased (trainer stats, Tomlinson (by the way how does he come up a Turf figure in the 180's for a horse who's Grandsire is Danzig?) River Downs PP's, etc...the quality has diminished considerably.

I buy it for the three news stories they give you.

"We landed on the Moon"

Fifty years from now, you can sell it on ebay and get your money back.

The amount of information that you get for $5.50 is unbelievable.

Yeah I like the work pattern for that one as well

I agree 100% about the M/L needing to be next to the entries and well as the conditions on each page. However, the 1 or 2 turn thing is taken care of by the configuration of the track and start/finish position of each race to the right of the conditions.

If you are using the graded's ML as your ML you are in trouble from the start

:rolleyes: it's all in the ink


-bt-

That would take care of the race itself, but I am talking past races...like 1 mile on the inner (which they don't run, but as an example) would be 2 turns, while 1 mile on the Main at AQU is 1...a mile and an eighth at AQU is 2 turns while at BEL it is 1 turn...so if you aren't someone who watches something involving horses on a daily basis, you might not know that when looking at PP's...what would be the harm in making some kind of designation in the PP's?

You have something against Hammersly's M/L's? Is there somewhere besides making my own that I should be getting them from?

And if that's the case, just another example of dimminshed quality? Not being able to use the M/L from horse racing's premiere paper.

They run 1 mile on the inner almost every day. It's so biased to the inside 3 posts it's laughable, however.

I didn't think they ran a flat mile, I thought it was like a mile and 70 yards...

Both... used to be more of the mile & 70 variety but for whatever reason they've trended towards the flat mile the last few winters.

Happy 3 thousandth post Phil.......


The DRF is the Kleenex of daily racing publications. Although they haven't come up with anything new in many years to offset the tools challenging for market share such as TGH or Ragozin to name a few they remain the standard by which all racing information is evaluated while still putting out a very reasonable product that is about 20% of the cost of TGH for a single track.

You can do far worse than spending $5.50 for 5-8 tracks with several daily columnlist reporting the news and events of the industry....

Try playing this game without PP's and trainer angles and see how quickly you miss them.

So your point is that since they include Thisledown, River Downs and Calder (which I don't think anyone can bet, I know I can't), that it is okay that they overcharge us and not care that there are errors strewn throughout, that their analysis is being viewed as poor by one (if not more) of their readers, that apparently (according to Chuck) their M/L is a joke and that suggestions made by their readers on how to possibly improve their product are dismissed without response?

No I definitely do not want to try and play the game without PP's, but I would like it more if they looked at their "Kleenex" type product and removed the boogers from it.

feel lucky you can even buy one. no one in this area carries it.

you are giving away secrets again. just use the thing for handicapping(PP's). half of what those guys say and pick is either crap, chalk or both. alot of time i wonder if they are betting what they pick to begin with!

Not even close to being a fair or logical comparison. Some people see it as a complete neccessity and having tremendous value, others will think it's a complete waste. So you fall into the latter. So be it.

Eric

Personally, I know which is which but I don't think it is that easy honestly. 1 mile races can be tricky and you need to know which tracks have a 1 mile chute and which ones don't. But what is it some kind of exclusive club? That's like saying, you should know which racetracks are Polytrack and which are Dirt and if you don't too bad? Do you also object to that information being in the PP's?

I'd pay $5.50 to get this thread to stop.

Jesus Christ.

Never thought I'd hear someone complain about paying five bucks for a DRF, when Ragozins are 35 DOLLARS A CARD and TG's are 25. At least you get multiple tracks from the Form, racing news and handicapping columns.

The only thing I'd agree with you on is that the Closer Looks are getting lazy, and the ink sucks, but that's about it. Everything else is fine, and $5.50 is a freaking bargain. Get a grip.

I have some old forms from the 80's and if you look at them they appear blank. There's so much more information in today's form than previously someone from back then would be shocked at the details now included and consider it a bargin. BY the way, I too am 1000 miles from anywhere to buy a form and do everything on line anyway.

Personally though, I prefer Brisnet, but that's me.

Spyder

My only thing with it is I wish I would go to white paper, instead of newspaper. I don't get it because I end up getting ink all over my face by about the 5th race.

If you're pressing the Form to your face, you're not using it right.

Personally, I think the DRF is great. I download a ton of race cards, read articles on line all the time, etc. -- and I still buy the paper-version DRF. To whatever extent you are going to be in the game, you have your tools and you use them. If the price of the tools is an issue, then you do without. If you don't see value in a certain tool, you don't buy it.

Eric

and what about when you go to the whip....I'm sure you've ruined many pairs of pants too...or have you looked?

Here's your locigal comparison as it pertains to Milk. Before I paid $4.00 for a gallon of milk. Now I pay $5.50 for that same gallon of milk because I have to expect that prices are increasing everywhere. Except now, the gallon of milk I buy is only 3 days from going sour instead of 10 days. I should accept this?

Where do I say that the information provided in the DRF is a complete waste? How the hell can one handicap without PP's? Is my point that difficult to comprehend? Do I write in code? Why shouldn't we expect the premiere racing periodical in our country to be top notch? If you feel that the DRF is top notch, and the errors and flaws I speak of don't exsist, then say so. But, I'm pretty sure that they do exist, because I don't just pull this crap out of my ass. I don't feel that the DRF's price increases over the past 2-3 years (somewhere between 35% and 40%) are justified based on the dimminishing quality over that same period.

I only whip with a local AP program, and this year they changed it and it is even better, no more gloss paper, it can withhold more now, it is great.

:D

It is more putting my hands on my face in disgust most of the time....like a 'why me' look

Sorry, but it's not an applicable comparison. You might feel it is, and that's OK. Perhaps your problem will be solved if you don't buy milk or the DRF. If you do both, I certainly wouldn't drink milk while reading the DRF. Good luck.

Eric

Why is it not applicable?

1. The DRF isn't what it used to be? Probably true print version but then again is your Sunday paper as good as it was 15 years ago?

2. Their product is deteriorating? Aside from print, DRF has a great product in Formulator. They obviously have a segmented approach. A thinned down print version for casual players and Formuator for the other folks. If you have not used Formulator, give it a spin.

3. The writing is poor? Yes, see #1. I, for one, long for the short but sweet days of The Racing Times. It was a sad day for us when Fox fell -- or was pushed -- off that boat.

4. If you find the DRF print version fairly not useful, aside from the PPs, get them for free from Youbet (or Bris PPs for free from TwinSpires). If you like some public handicapper insight and play the major tracks, I'm sure the NY, LA and KY papers will have that.

5. Take the savings and get a Race Replays account. At $60 for 90 days, that's about $.75 a day, not very much money really.

6. Morning Line? I don't know what to say.

If you took a step back and considered how much you have to spend, what some of the options are and how to spend it the wisest, you might be pleasantly surprised at how much bang you can get for that $5.50 a day, even if it's only a couple days a week.

I do really miss The Racing Times.