All posts by richhalvey

Handicapping and Betting

Value Betting

This is a re-post from an article I wrote in July. Seemed appropriate since Willet and La Verdad hooked up again last weekend.

Anyone who says, I’m going to try to beat Horse A with Horse B because Horse A’s odds are “too low” doesn’t understand value. It’s one thing to say, Horse B has a higher probability of winning, or Horse B has a 20% chance of winning but his odds will be 10-1, but it is misleading to suggest you should pass Horse A just because Horse B has higher odds, and you’ll see exactly what I mean in one of my examples below.

This is one of the great fallacies of horseracing – that you can’t make money at 8-5. You may not be able to make a lot of money in one fell swoop, but if you think that a horse at 8-5 (39% chance) has a 60% chance of winning, 8-5 represents a pretty nice overlay. And even if your “second choice” is at 5-1 (17% chance), unless you think that horse really should be 2-1, your only legitimate win bet is to bet the 8-5 horse.

Look, every horseplayer has an unshakable opinion on a race he is interested in. Just because I think one horse is better than another and you think exactly the opposite, doesn’t make me right or wrong. Only the running of the race can do that. There is only one way to bet to win, and that is to FIND SOLID OVERLAYS. Period.

The mathematics of betting are very simple. If you are a good handicapper and you can assess a horse’s probability of winning (or finishing second or third) and you limit your bets to those races where the difference between the tote odds and your odds reaches a certain threshold value, you will make money.

The outfits that say, I’ll only bet this horse at 4-1 or greater without telling you what they think the horse’s probabilities are, simply cannot understand the mathematics of winning. A horse that is 40% in your opinion is a great bet at 5-2 or higher. He is at least a reasonable bet at 2-1.

Believe me, the good public handicappers either do that overtly or in general. When they try to steer you to a 20-1 horse, they better say, this horse has at least a 15% chance of winning the race, because in my opinion at less than 15%, you just aren’t picking reliable animals.

Let me use some races from the Thursday July 3 card at Belmont to illustrate some points.

The third race wound up as a 4 horse field. The favorite, La Verdad, was 1-9, a 90% probability according to the crowd. He was an impossible and foolish win bet, even at those odds because HE WAS NOT AN OVERLAY. And if someone said, we’re going to try to beat La Verdad with Willet, Willet would have only been a legitimate win bet if you honestly believed that he had a higher probability of winning than his tote board odds. If you hear something like, if La Verdad doesn’t win, Willet probably will, and you don’t hear what they think the probabilities are, they aren’t doing the right amount of work. Willet in that race went off at a little over 7-2 (22%). Now if you believed La Verdad was 60% and Willet was 33% (2-1), by all means you should have bet Willet. Otherwise, maybe you could have looked at a cold exacta which turned a 1-9 shot into even money, actually a pretty substantial overlay. If La Verdad was 90% to win, Willet might have been 90% to place, meaning any exacta that paid more than $3.00 was a good parimutuel play. Whether or not Willet was a win bet was wholly dependent on what you thought his odds of winning the race were, not only that he was the only horse with a chance of upsetting La Verdad.

Let’s look at one other race from that day, the 6th. Here was my line.

Horse               Track Odds          My Odds

  • 1                            9-1                       50-1
  • 2                            9-5                          5-2
  • 3     SCR
  • 4                            4-1                          6-1
  • 5                           12-1                     20-1
  • 6                            3-1                          7-5
  • 7                            2-1                          3-1

What’s the play here? A win bet on the 6 horse and a reasonably healthy exacta, 6/2. The 6 was at least a 100% overlay for me. If you wanted to bet a trifecta, it would have been 6/2/4,7. The 6 won the race by a comfortable length and a half, the 2 gave me some nervous moments but closed to grab second by a head, and the 4 finished third. (When you read my blog post entitled Risk Intelligence, you’ll understand why you should use the 4 and the 7.) The winner paid $8.20, the exacta was $35, and the trifecta was $95. This was a six horse race with a winner at 3-1 and the favorite second, and it was a prime bet for me.

Now your line could have been different, and I am certainly not right every time (or even most of the time), but you will never hear me say, I’m going to try to beat the 2 with the 6. I’m going to say, the 6 is the value. And on my line, no other horse was.

Opinions

Surveillance, Security and Petitions

If you want to start a passionate argument, express an adamant opinion about the absolute insurers rule. I’m sure most of you are familiar with the rule, but just in case, it simply states that the trainer of record is ultimately responsible for the condition of any horse in his charge. In the case of a medication violation, unless there is evidence otherwise, the trainer is assumed responsible. Although it may seem contrary to the foundation principal of American jurisprudence, trainers are presumed guilty and must demonstrate they are innocent.

The courts have provided no relief for trainers who argue they have been denied due process.

The New York Court of Appeals (the court of last resort in New York), held that “…the trainer responsibility rule is a practical and effective means of promoting these State interests–both in deterring violations and in exercising sanctions. The imposition of strict responsibility compels trainers to exercise a high degree of vigilance in guarding their horses and to report any illicit use of drugs, medications or other restricted substances by other individuals having access to their horses. Additionally, the rebuttable presumption of responsibility facilitates the very difficult enforcement of the restrictions on the use of drugs and other substances in horse racing. Indeed, it would be virtually impossible to regulate the administering of drugs to race horses if the trainers, the individuals primarily responsible for the care and condition of their horses, could not be held accountable for the illicit drugging of their horses or for the failure either to safeguard their horses against such drugging or to identify the person actually at fault. It is not surprising, therefore, that trainer responsibility rules have been upheld almost without exception, in other jurisdictions.”  

Pretty amazing logic. Finding out who is actually guilty is just….well, it’s just too hard. According to the court, without the absolute insurers rule, commissions would never get to punish wrongdoers. At least some of us would say, before we get to the point of guilty until proven innocent, shouldn’t we be doing as much as we can to keep violations from occurring and investigating them thoroughly when they do? There are a number of good ideas floating around out there, including scrupulously tracking drugs used and having surveillance cameras on the backstretch. I can’t go to the drug store and buy sudafed without having my personal information scanned into a tracking system, but somehow it is too complicated to require that all drugs administered to horses be tracked through a central, on-track pharmacy? We can’t require detailed records on everything from where a trainer gets his hay to what legal supplements the horse is getting? Can you honestly say, commission rules are doing everything they can to prevent violations, or at least make them easier to investigate, and not just punish them? Apparently, “just too hard” constitutes a rational basis for guilty until proven innocent.

What are the state interests? On the surface to maintain the integrity of the sport. Realistically it is to maximize revenues by ensuring the bettors that racing is clean. Not many people would bet on a game they think is rigged.

I’ve previously written about Wind of Bosphorus, a horse trained by Doug O’Neill. Wind of Bosphorus was found to have oxazepam in its system, and O’Neill was given a suspension and a fine for the positive test. There was no evidence that O’Neill (or his staff) administered the drug; in fact there was no explanation for how the drug got into the horse’s system. Unfortunately for O’Neill, there was also no evidence that someone other than his folks may have been responsible for the presence of oxazepam. Since O’Neill couldn’t prove his innocence, he was presumed guilty under the absolute insurers rule. If Belmont had a surveillance system in place, perhaps O’Neill or the State Gaming Commission may have been able to figure out how Wind of Bosphorus acquired the oxazepam. Maybe I’m in the minority, but I’d sure like to know things like, why would a trainer use a sedative to improve performance, and why is the commission even testing for oxazepam? I’d also like to know just how hard the Commission looked to find the culprit, assuming there was one and it wasn’t simply cross-contamination.

Much of the serious betting public has become disenchanted with what they perceive to be an inability to clean up racing. A group of racing fans, mostly in California, have started a petition drive to improve surveillance and security as well as make penalties for violators  tougher. http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/improved-thoroughbred-surveillance-and-safety

There is also nothing wrong with ensuring a race track knows who is accessing the backstretch. Many office buildings have security at the entrance, and while it can take a few minutes for visitors to gain access, it’s not really that inconvenient. Only allowing access to badged employees and escorted visitors makes complete sense.

Finally, there is the issue of penalties. The petitioners request to provide “appropriate consequences for all those that break the rules governing race day medication” is fine in concept, but leaves a lot of room for abuse by racing commissions that are comprised of political appointees, at least some of whom have fewer qualifications than the average guy who regularly attends the races. Everything is appropriate if the racing commission says it is. I submit the adoption of TCO2 rules, something that may or may not be performance enhancing, fits that category.

I was in Germany this summer and found time to take a day cruise on the middle Rhine between Rudesheim and Boppard. One of the most interesting aspects was the number of small towns that dotted the riverbank, each one with its own castle and its own set of rules, sort of like horseracing. You didn’t have to be a particularly sharp witted baron to figure out there was money to be made charging tolls to boats that wanted to use the river. Now the idea that everyone with a castle should be charging tolls created some problems, and eventually the situation came to the attention of the Holy Roman Empire (sort of like the legislature of the state). The Holy Roman Emperors assumed control of the tolling, and decided which town acquired the ability to charge tolls. As you might imagine, this got to be a pretty political process. The Emperors had three general guidelines: don’t have too many tolling stations, don’t put them too close together, and don’t forget to take care of your supporters. So while there may have only been 12 or so tolling stations at least five kilometers apart operating at any one time, over the course of the thousand years that the system was in place, 79 different places ultimately had castles and tolling stations. Much in the same way, racing is governed individually by the states in which racing is allowed. Only there is no Holy Racing Emperor to make sure the system operates smoothly. We are instead left with racing commissions whose members vary from very qualified to barely qualified. And to compound matters, New York ( or any state) is often barely interested in what New Jersey is doing, much less California – in fact, a state can choose not to be influenced by anything another state is doing, as the CHRB made clear when they said they would not adopt a dual standard to account for the Lasix bump affecting TCO2.

All this is to say

  • I don’t trust racing commissions to come up with the fairest, most sensible set of rules, and
  • to the extent it is possible, politics need to be taken out of rulemaking.

The complexities of making rules are myriad, and I’ll give you my opinions based on the research I’ve been doing and the conversations I’ve had with people involved in racing.

  • The absolute insurers rule need to be examined in light of recent cases. I’ve mentioned the case of Christopher Grove in West Virginia who was found in violation of the medication rules for the drug Coramine, a stimulant. Grove, who wasn’t in the state at the time the violation occurred, and his attorney argued, “As currently applied, the rule is overly broad and provides uncircumscribed power to the racing commission and the stewards and actually discourages the conducting of thorough and comprehensive investigations in cases where the facts are not obvious. As demonstrated by Mr. Grove’s case, allowing the racing commission and the stewards to penalize a trainer when there is little to no evidence supporting the alleged violations (or even in the state at the time of the alleged violation) amounts to a direct violation of an individual’s state and federal procedural due process rights.” Naturally Grove lost, but two points are well taken. First is that any racing commission needs to conduct an actual investigation and produce findings that clearly implicate the trainer beyond, “the hell with it, we’ll just rely on the absolute insurers rule.” I’ve had people say to me, it’s like blowing 0.14 on a breathalyzer – at that point you’re presumptively intoxicated. No, it’s not like that exactly. It is all but impossible to not blame you for your inebriated state. In the case of a horse, all we know after a positive test is that something happened – we can’t blame the horse for getting jittery and grabbing an oxazepam – but we don’t know what involvement the trainer might have had. For those of you that are strident about assigning trainer guilt, I’ll just ask, if you owned a company and one of your employees embezzled, or a thief broke in and robbed you, should you be punished too under the dictum that you should have known someone would steal and it’s your fault they did? Christopher Grove and his attorney were right on. The absolute insurers rule needs to be revised to force the commissions to conduct an investigation to find the guilty party and punish them.
  • There is a lot of griping about the fact that once a trainer is found in violation and given days, his stable can be given over to an assistant trainer. There are those who believe there should be no chance for business as usual for trainers found in violation. Having an assistant assume the stable may somehow seem not quite right, but on the other hand dispersing the stable is perhaps too close to a racing version of Sharia law to be fair. At the least it is something that thoroughly needs to be debated. Steve Davidowitz makes a compromise suggestion that only for violations beyond 60 days should the horses be dispersed. I personally think that whether a stable gets broken up should be dependent on two things: the egregiousness of the violation and the ability of the commission to prove the trainer knowingly and willfully sought to improve the performance of his horse. If a commission wanted to disperse a stable based on the facts and evidence surrounding the Wind of Bosphorus case, then in the words of Mr. Bumble, “the law is a ass – a idiot.”
  • The vast majority of owners and trainers, at least the ones I know, are honest people who love the game and love their animals the way any of us loves our housepets. But I would add, there may be owners who are complicit in any purposely wrongful medication or treatment issues, and if that is the case, they need to be punished no less than the trainer. Once again, commissions should be required to get to the bottom of any medication violation or mistreatment of animals.
  • There has been a suggestion to adopt the Hong Kong Racing rules, considered by many to be the standard by which racing should be governed. I do not trust the task to individual racing commissions, but I would trust the task to a national blue ribbon commission made up of experts from the various racing constituents – veterinarians, testing laboratories, the betting public, owners, and trainers. Yes, I left out racing commissions purposely. Once this modern set of model rules has been thoroughly vetted and adopted by the blue ribbon commission, states should have a period of time in which to adopt it or face a boycott by owners, trainers and bettors.
  • One of my personal gripes is that racing is not the same everywhere. I guarantee you that some of the horses running at Arapahoe Park are there because they are not good enough to compete at Santa Anita or Saratoga. Great if all you are going to focus on is racing in California or New York, but if we have a national commission it needs to account for the differences between A, B, and C tracks. I did a blog on a three tier system for Lasix that understands the horses at C level tracks are not of the same quality as those at A level tracks. Nothing wrong with recognizing that. I realize some people see the issue as totally black or white. I believe this, like most things in life, has shades of gray and I think a national commission could fairly deal with it.

Let me emphasize, the hearts of the people behind the petition are in the right place. Racing commissions, trainers and the betting public need better surveillance and security, and given the cost of monitoring equipment these days, it would be hard to argue cost is a barrier. We do need rules that are fair and will ensure the integrity of racing. I applaud those who are giving their time and energy to the petition and racing. It is only by involvement that we have any chance to change things for the better. I urge you to look at the petition and extend your support in whatever way you think is appropriate.

Selections

Belmont October 19

Race 1

  • 2 N.F.’s Destiny – was claimed by David Jacobson for $20K in September. He raced the horse back at the $20K level, but in open company, and he faded mildly in the last furlong. The trainer chops the claiming price in half today. The last race he won was at $10K and perhaps Jacobson thought the horse was better than that when he claimed him but now knows better. His pace figures dominate the field, but you’ll be lucky to get the 2-1 ML.
  • 4 Socialsaul – was claimed by Jacobson for $16K last out and gets dropped today. His last race was difficult – he was bounced around at the start, dropped all the way back to last, but closed decently. Has 3 wins in 10 starts at BEL. Looks like Jacobson has his bases covered this race.
  • 6 Awakino Cat – mainly a turf horse but is 2 for 3 on the fast dirt. He was eased in his last race three weeks ago, and comes back at a fire sale price on a surface he usually doesn’t run on. The drop looks negative, and you might look for the addition of front wraps. We’ll see if he makes it to the starting gate. If he goes, he has the numbers to get into the race.
  • 3 Ten Items Or Less – Horse generally runs like he is in the express lane. Ran lights out in his last three at FL, and has won over the BEL surface. If the droppers turn out to be negative, he might be the one that moves up.

Race 2

  • 4 Collinito – Actually won a race at GP earlier this year but was DQ’d. Been off 8 months, has been working steadily if not remarkably for his return. Showed a lot of early foot in his last race,  and may have some competition up front today from the 7. Still, if he runs like he did at GP he’s a major threat.
  • 8 Double Whammy – I might eventually get tired of saying, was claimed last out by Jacobson because it seems to happen so much. He grabbed the horse from Pletcher for $40K and brings him back at the same level, a typical Jacobson move. He seems to like claiming a horse and trying to get a purse and a sale pretty quickly. His SAR race showed a little bit of talent, certainly enough to top this field.
  • 10 Pisco Bliss – Chad Brown trainee was off for a year before coming back a month ago at BEL. Despite the 5th place finish, he was only a length and a half from all the money on a pretty decent pace and time. Brown is having an excellent fall BEL meeting and about everything he puts on the track runs. If he improves off his last, he’s a major threat to take the big prize.
  • 11 Cee No More – only has one turf start in four tries and that wasn’t a great race. Ran well in a race washed off the turf last out, but given his experience I’m giving him some minor consideration here.

Race 3

  • 1 Andromeda’s Risk – Has been looking for a soft spot since breaking her maiden in Jan on the inner dirt at AQU. Her last two have been at this level, although this is her first try at a route, a move Bruce Brown is fair at. This field is a combined 7 for 123, so despite the fact that her last race wasn’t spectacular, she’s only had 7 starts and I’m looking for a winner in one of the horses that hasn’t settled into a NW2L career. Take this race analysis with that perspective in mind.
  • 2 Pitched – another who only has 7 lifetime starts. Broke her maiden last out at Parx after being claimed by Gregg Matties. Does have a third on the BEL dirt in her career. Perhaps now that she has a win under her belt, she’ll find a groove.
  • 6 Kate Is a Ten – although she is 1 for 22, she had three races on the turf before getting back on the dirt. She’s had an interesting career, 8 races on the fast dirt, 7 on the turf and 7 on a wet track. She’s not an inspiring win bet, but she does have the figures to find one of the back holes.
  • 5 Lemon and Honey – is a 1 for 16 horse that actually has her win at the distance – in fact, she’s 5 for 5 in the money at the distance. Another that seems less probable to win than finish in the money.

Race 4

  • 8 Confessa – Ran a nice maiden race at a mile and an eighth at SAR in July, came back on the turf at BEL and ran evenly after being wide around the turn and into the stretch. In fact, of the nine runners, six of them ran their last race on the turf. This is a weak field in my opinion, and that gives the horse a chance.
  • 3 Manner of Speaking – hasn’t quite stretched to the mile, but has been in the mix at 7F. Switched trainers to Linda Rice last out after laying off close to a year, and I figure she gets a race to figure out how to get the most out of the horse. She thinks a mile on the dirt might be the answer, and we’ll see if she is right.
  • 5 Piccolo Flats – has one race on the BEL dirt, but it was an off the turf event on a muddy surface. Still, that’s one of the better races on her resume. Gets a nice switch from Lanerie to Irad Ortiz and in a field where every horse has some negative, she may have fewer of those than positives.
  • 4 Saharan Seranade – Is one of the horses that has primarily been raced on the dirt. Her races haven’t been horrible or outstanding – just sort of middling. We’ll see if the switch to Castellano makes a difference.

Race 5

  • 8 Doukas – I’m laying even money that Imbriale pronounces it Doo-kas with a hard k instead of the French pronunciation of the composer of the Sorcerer’s Apprentice – Du-cah. Either way, the horse has two strong races, one at this distance. She’s got some early lick, which wasn’t really be advantageous on the grass Saturday, and she has the hot Rudy Rodriguez. Not a stickout, but a lot of positives.
  • 10 Lox – too bad there isn’t a horse named Bagel running. That would make for a stirring stretch duel. First timer goes for Pletcher, and it looks like he isn’t done rolling out his quality two year old crop. This one goes for celebrity owner Bobby Flay, and I tend to think Flay is looking to start making some of the $140,000 purchase price back.  Steady series of works, and a really nice 59 and 1 on the turf two weeks ago.
  • 2 Lucky Song – Goes for Chad Brown, the other trainer who is lights out with first time fillies on the turf. Looked like he was trying to get her ready for SAR, but had to wait until this spot. Snappy workout 6 days ago, good turf breeding, especially for the distance. Have to respect “Heckofajob” Brownie.
  • 7 All in Fun – wasn’t totally ready to run first out at 6 furlongs on the BEL turf. McGaughey has been working the horse at the Fair Hill training center and she should come back better than first out. She wasn’t disgraced losing to My Cara Mia and Greywalls, both of which ran in the Grade 3 Miss Grillo.

Race 6

With the scratch of Summer Breezing I may throw in 5 Partly Mocha. He is a closing sprinter and can be given consideration in this field.

  • 9 Summer Breezing – has been racing with slightly better, Laid off for close to 8 months before coming to SAR for a couple of 5 1/2 F turf sprints, He just missed in the first one, bounced a bit in the second and has been given 6 weeks to recover. Has the best figures and a nice string of workouts for the comeback.
  • 7 Mish Mosh – Claimed by Jacobson, out of a win at this same level. He jumped the horse to $50K but bounces him back down today. Spends more time on synthetic and dirt surfaces, but does have 6 in the money finishes in eight attempts. Nice pressing style and good numbers.
  • 2 Ziptronic – Should be the frontrunner. The Repole stable has given the horse to unknown trainer Bernardo Callejas after Bruce Levine coaxed three straight wins out of the horse. The trainer switch is interesting as is the move from NW1X to an open $40K. Likes the distance and likes the BEL turf.
  • 3 Thomas Hill – more seconds and thirds than wins – in his last ten races has zero wins but has not finished finished worse than 4th by 6 lengths. Might make the exotics.

Race 7

  • 1/1a Etiqutte/Treasure – I think Jimmy Jerkens is back and he has two good starters in this one. Etiquette is probably the stronger of the two entrants. Lost to Feathered but easily bested the rest of the field. Has a nice series of sharp workouts for this race. Treasure has two starts, both of which  looked good. Makes the entry that much more powerful.
  • 7 Eloquent Tribute – was a close third in the race where Treasure finished second. Second best number of the horses that have started.
  • 9 Overprepared – Pletcher traineee has a nice series of workouts for her debut. Good dirt breeding and should like the distance.
  • 12 Zealous Wildcat – Michelle Nevin trainee will have to overcome an outside post. Like the workout pattern and the Ortiz/Nevin combo has hit at over 30%. Could be a factor with the right trip.

Race 8

My top three choices were scratched here. I’ll add 2 Live in Joy and the 1a Compliance Officer

  • 6 Bashart – three straight graded stakes, the last one a strong second. Has not yet faced older, but has plenty of talent . Prepped nicely at Fair Hill. This is a a good spot for him to pass the test against older.
  • 5 Inchcape – Has been stuck at this level for most of the year, but his last race was very encouraging. He cut back to a mile after running longer and just missed the win. Will have to get past Which Market, but I like his chances today.
  • 11 Slim Shadey – Really hidden horse with a big chance. Last race was a stakes on the slop at a mile and five eighths, and before that were two long races. Perhaps those races will affect the horse if he tries to go with the speed in the race, but he has enough back class to rise above the field.
  • 7 Middleburg – not a win machine; more of a place machine. Given he is in the mix close to the wire every time he could grab a piece.

Race 9      The Bowl Game     1-7-8-4

  • 1 Slumber – Placed in graded stakes at GP his last two starts. Has a set of figures that dominates the field and is 4 for 7 at the distance. Very strong in this race.
  • 2 Alakazan Alakazan – won last out at KD going wire to wire. Has some talent but not one I’ll focus on.
  • 3 North Slope – Finally won a NW2X after 6 tries. Looks a little weaker than the best in this field. Minor award at best.
  • 4 Micromanage – eased in the JCGC last out. Before that finished third in a Grade 3 at Parx and won the Birdstone at SAR. He’s been running with the best older handicap horses in NY and on his best day is the equal of any in here. Pletcher/Castellano a powerful duo.
  • 5 Wealth – MTO
  • 6 Grand Rapport – Good at the distance, but hasn’t beaten anything better than an OC $35K. Can’t get behind him.
  • 7 Sky Blazer – had some outs in the Baruch while seven wide on the turn. In that race he was beaten by none other than Wise Dan, no shame on any horse’s resume. He looks like a contender to me.
  • 8 St. Albans Boy – Has been running competitively all year but with lesser animals. Relegated to the back holes.

Race 10

  • 5 Lady Kreesa – just missed last time out for David Donk and Irad Ortiz. Has been leaving her backers wanting for four races now. Has been bet down to favoritism each time and hasn’t managed better than a third. Don’t know how many more chances she gets.
  • 3 Keen Katana – broke her maiden here in June, raced once at SAR and has been rested for six weeks. Good tactical speed. Lots of upside here.
  • 6 G Note – hasn’t looked good on the soft going, but should get a firmer track today.  I’ll look for her to prove her value today.
  • 2 Willow U – Last two races give her contender status. Seems to have trouble finding her way to the winner’s circle but this is not a strong field. Could be in the exotics.
Selections

Belmont October 18

Start spreading the news, it’s NY Breds day at Belmont. State-bred races are just like other races – value can be found.

Race 1

  • 2 Tizquick – in a mediocre maiden field Tizquick has a lot of upside. He lost his first start to Upstart, a horse that subsequently won the Funny Cide and finished second in the Champagne. He’s showed improved speed in his two starts, including his last the Bertram Bongard stakes. He’s listed at 6-5 on the ML and I have no reason to expect he’ll be lower than that, but he does look strong in this spot. He switches from Alvarado to Rosario.
  • 1/1a Black Tide/Fallfire – This Ralph D’Alessandro trained pair both have chances, although Fallfire looks to be the stronger of the two. Black Tide has had two starts on sloppy tracks, not showing much in either, and a start at a mile, a distance he doesn’t seem well suited for. He could be a lot better than we’ve seen. Fallfire lost to Good Luck Gus and Thank You and both horses are going in the Sleepy Hollow in the next race. He has been running at Finger Lakes, although I don’t see that as a negative. FL has some pretty fair state-bred races. He has a ton of speed and fading in stakes races isn’t of serious concern – he’s against better horses. It’s a strong combined duo.
  • 5 Limerick Lightning – first time starter for Colum O’Brien with a nice series of morning drills. O’Brien has only 4 starts with firsters with no wins – in fact, he hasn’t recorded a winner in any of his six 2014 starts. Still, this one has enough positives and the field is mediocre enough to make him interesting.

Race 2     Sleepy Hollow     2-3-5

  • 1 Thank You – couldn’t win in four MSW starts but did finish second in the NY Breeders Futurity at FL. Doesn’t get me excited.
  • 2 Ostrolenka – won his maiden by 14 lengths at today’s distance in a nine horse field with a good final time after doing little on the slop in his first start. Pletcher trainee is listed at 6-5 on the ML and based on that powerful win he could dominate the field.
  • 3 Bullheaded Boy – broke his maiden in the SAR slop at 5F and raced in two state-bred stakes. Puts the blinkers on for Pletcher. His main jock, Johnny V, decided to go with Ostrolenka so Jose Ortiz picks up the mount. He has chances, but I’m leaning in other directions.
  • 4 Breakin the Fever – a winner by 10 lengths in his maiden on a sloppy BEL track.  Looks like the strategy will be to go to the front in which case he’ll have to outgun Good Luck Gus and Ostrolenka.  I’m not confident he’ll be that good.
  • 5 Market Conduct – finished behind Bullhead Boy in the Bongard Stakes but does have the ability to be coming late. Has a chance in this race, especially if the 2, 4, and 7 knock each other out.
  • 6 Bellamy Way – Finished second behind Ostolenka, but really didn’t finish powerfully in either of his starts. An outside shot in my opinion.
  • 7 Good Luck Gus – Another that broke his maiden on a sloppy SAR track. He is not a need to lead sort, but he hasn’t gone the mile yet. Did beat Thank You in the the Breeder’s Futurity at FL. In a two year old race where horses have limited starts nothing that happens is a surprise. Still some things are more likely than others and I’ll admit he seems less likely a winner than the Pletcher horses.

Race 3     The Maid of the Mist      9-6-3-5

  • 1 Hard to Stay Notgo – love the name, like the horse, although not as much as others. Broke her maiden on a fast SAR track and ran well in a state-bred stakes at six and a half furlongs. She was demolished (like evreryone) by Temper Mint Patty last out, and I’m not sure why I should think she might turn the tables today.
  • 2 Lady Bling – broke poorly in the Miss Grillo, was really wide but ran evenly. Both her races have been on the turf; certainly can get the distance. I’m not taken with a plodding style, so I probably won’t have her on many tickets.
  • 3 Dunn Listening – did break her maiden in a state-bred stakes at FL, but had trouble at the start in her follow up in the Breeder’s Futurity, a race won by the aforementioned Good Luck Gus. Has a closing but not plodding style and at 15-1 ML she looks overlayed.
  • 4 Myfourchix – Another that broke her maiden in a stakes, this one at SAR. but was another destroyed by Temper Mint Patty. It may have been the mud that gave her problems, but we won’t know until after this race is run.
  • 5 Sweetpollypurebrd – two nice races for the ultra-hot Rudy Rodriguez. Doesn’t look like Temper Mint Patty but is a competitor for the lesser awards.
  • 6 Quezon – six length winner in a pretty good time in the mud at BEL a month ago. Tiz Wonderful two year olds have been impressive this year and this is a good one. Should be fine at the mile distance.Perhaps the main threat to the 9
  • 7 Sandra – seven length winner at 7F at BEL two weeks ago. There is enough speed in this race so not let her loose early. Could be any kind at this point, and although her Beyers doesn’t look good in comparison, her pace figure is. I’d say ignore at your own risk.
  • 8 Serious Happiness – 30-1 ML and probably deserves it. Took her five times to break her maiden, which she did at Parx. I’m not a fan.
  • 9 Temper Mint Patty – devastating win in the mud at BEL in September after breaking her maiden at SAR. She’s fast, she’s well-bred, and deserves the favorites role.

Race 4     The Mohawk      3-9-1-8

  • 1 Kharafa – Only one win this year, but has been competitive in all his races. At 5-1 ML he’s priced where he should be. Hard to see the win, but not hard to see him being part of the exotics.
  • 2 Analysis – just doesn’t look good enough to compete with these.
  • 3 King Kressa – between him and Lubash you have the winner of most of the state bred turf route stakes. Probably the better of the two at the mile and a sixteenth.
  • 4 Captain Gaughen – I can’t see his chances being very good against the best state bred turfers.
  • 5 Harbor King – MTO
  • 6 Ocala Jim – he’s a good horse, but has never been competitive above NW1X. Hard to imagine he beats the best in this field.
  • 7 Saturday Appeal – MTO
  • 8 Notacatbutallama – Perhaps a half step below King Kressa and Lubash, but still belongs with this group. Pletcher/Velasquez are always dangerous.
  • 9 Lubash – one of the big three in this race. Has a nice pressing style, and can be effective at the mile and a sixteenth. Seems to prefer the firmer going, but the track has been drying out and will likely be no worse than good. See-saw for the win with King Kressa.
  • 10 Front – another who is a good horse, just not as good as some in here. His two wins this year have been against lesser. Maybe toss him in the back holes.

Race 5     The Iroquois     8-6-4-1

  • 1 Capella Dancer – has been mostly starring at Finger Lakes and Presque Isle. Won a stakes on a muddy track, and on the wet going has won 7 of 10. Not so bad on the fast dirt with 4 wins and 7 seconds out of 16 starts. She may be a little over her head in this group but she can’t be immediately dismissed.
  • 2 Make the Moment – one win at BEL, another that seems to upgrade when the track is wet. 12-1 on the ML and that about describes her chances.
  • 3 Kimmies Lucky Star – plodding sort hasn’t won this year and is still eligible for NW1X races. Can’t see her making an impact in this race.
  • 4 Willet – Finished 3rd in the Gallant Bloom last out. In eight starts at BEL she has 3 wins, 2 place, and 2 show. Needless to say, she likes BEL and that is always a positive factor. Perhaps she’s tailed off a bit as a 6 year old, but still represents a big player here.
  • 5 Irish Whisper – has been off since April but last time she was on break she came home in front. Still, she looks a cut or two below stakes level and would have to fun faster than she ever has to get a piece here.
  • 6 Risky Rachel – switches to the George Weaver barn for this start. Won earlier this year at Tampa, and ran competitively in her two sprint stakes at SAR and BEL earlier this year. Weaver has her cranked given the swift breeze six days ago. Upset possibilities
  • 7 Cape Cod Carol – couldn’t beat an OC $40 field at Parx last out. Was slammed by La Verdad in the slop in the Broadway stakes and no reason to expect a turn around today.
  • 8 La Verdad – makes a living beating this type of field. Ran into the monstrously tough Artemis Argotera in her last two, but still ran creditably. Depends a lot on the pace, but the expectation is that she’ll be able to get to the front and dictate comfortable fractions. If she does she should run away from the field.
  • 9 Champagne Ruby – Won the Niagara at FL but flopped in the mud in her next. She’s not had much luck in the statebred affairs at BEL and seems one of the also rans in this race.

Race 6

  • 10 Ode to the Hunt – finished second first out, outrunning his 19-1 odds. He’s come back with a dazzling series of works. Knows the track, knows the distance and gets the nod.
  • 11 Trees Are Wild – Nick Esler is 29% with firsters. Rockport Harbor is a fair turf sire, and his dam Kindness has plenty of turf upside. Works are decent but will have to overcome the outside post.
  • 9 Brother O’Connell – had some touble in both his starts but with a clean break and smart trip he competes here.
  • 12 Gear Jammer – had the lead most of the race in his last start and just missed holding off Ode to the Hunt. Carlos Martin does well with two year olds.

Race 7     The Empire Distaff     5-9-3-1a

  • 2 Pennymine – hasn’t been the distance and has been up against OC $40K. Not likely today.
  • 3 Sunny Desert – love the way Bruce Levine has brought her up to the race. Definitely seems better at a mile and a sixteenth. 2 for 4 on the BEL turf and a contender today.
  • 4 Flipcup – has been racing with these sorts all year. Prefers to lay back and make a late move and that may be effective today, Contender.
  • 5 Princess Violet – came into her own last race after knocking heads with the likes of Untapable and Stonetastic in graded races. Has the fastest pace figure, but she hasn’t been successful at the distance yet. Favorite but not unbeatable.
  • 6 Lady Gracenote – outsider in this field.
  • 1 Dreaming of Cara – has been competing with state bred stakes runners but not very successfully. She hasn’t had a win in 10 starts this year and no reason to expect today is the day.
  • 7 Storied Lady – hasn’t been able to crack through at the stakes level but has some in the money finishes. That looks like her best hope today.
  • 8 Tahoe Tigress – only win this year was an open OC $62 NW2X. Otherwise in her stakes tries she’s not been a threat. I don’t think she’s a threat today.
  • 9 Star Grazing – Jimmy Jerkens is looking to get back on track at the fall BEL meeting. She won the Fleet Indian as she zipped through her conditions, had a troubled trip last time and never really got into the race. Still, she needs to be respected here.
  • 10 Unbelievable Dream – 0 for 8 this year, should be 0 for 9 after this race.
  • 1a Carameaway – stronger of the two Friedman entrants. Loves to run to the front and looks to be in top shape. Some plusses and minuses, but definitely a contender.

Race 8     Empire Classic     8-3-6-2

  • 2 Sinistra – won the Shipman and then went into a couple of open OC $62 events where he ran respectably. Contender.
  • 3 Saratoga Snacks – is 2-1 on the ML but I’m not sure he deserves it. Was good as a four year old but hasn’t made it to the winner’s circle this year. On her best day he tops this field, but I wouldn’t take him at 33% odds.
  • 4 BeautyinthePulpit – beat the 3 last out at a mile after being off a couple of months. He  loves the BEL surface and is fine at the distance but I’m going to look elsewhere for the win.
  • 5 Effinex – second in the Albany but only wins this year were on the AQU inner. Not the one today.
  • 6 So Lonesome – was the winner of the Albany in his first race on the dirt wince last year at BEL. Seems to be a little in and out but at his best is a fast horse. Contender.
  • 7 Eye Luv Lulu – in the money at best
  • 1 Empire Dreams – seems a step slower than the best of these and relagated to a minor award.
  • 8 Sioux – improving 3 year old dominated an OC $40K field last out. I like the works and Hushion has been good in spots like this. Major Player
  • 1a Awesome Vision – couldn’t compete against open company last two outs but has been useful in state bred stakes. I think he’s slated for a minor award at best.

Race 9    The Ticonderoga       10-5-9-6

  • 2 Mah Jong Madness – won the Mt. Vernon at a mile at BEL earlier in the year. She seems to have tailed off in the last couple but to be fair they were on a good turf she doesn’t prefer. Could get a piece at a price, but that’s the best I can see.
  • 3 Run to Mama – has done well with state-bred OC $40K but doesn’t seem fast enough to take the top spot in here.
  • 1 Selenite – won the NY Stallion Series at SAR at nice odds. You’ll get those odds again today but I don’t think she is likely to finish in front. Another with back hole prospects at best.
  • 4 Palace Dreams – SCR
  • 5 Invading Humor – has a four race winning streak for Bruce Levine. I think the streak ends today, but her speed is still dangerous. Hot Joel Rosario rides.
  • 1a Chrysolite – doesn’t appear to have the speed to contend in this field.
  • 6 Strike Accord – second in the Hettinger to Invading Humor. She should be coming to the race in top form.  I like her to catch a minor piece.
  • 7 One Time Baby – has been strong in OC $40K races but unfortunately this is not a $40K race.
  • 8 Old Harbor – has run well at this level. I think she is better than 15-1 but she looks no better than a minor player to me.
  • 10 Discreet Marq – the fastest, the classiest, the best.
  • 11 Stock Fund – not a win type and definitely not a likely winner today.
  • 12 Caribean Beat – AE gets in, but but shouldn’t have an impact on the outcome.

Race 10   The Hudson     4-7-10-5

  • 1 Chapman – has some early foot, but hasn’t won since the AQU inner dirt. Not at all likely to win; a minor slice at best
  • 2 West Hills Giant – has been competitive with these for a while, and wouldn’t be a huge surprise if he was in the exotics but I’m starting elsewhere.
  • 3 Noble Cornerstone – has been popping up and down in class but won a nice open allowance last out. I’m not putting him in the top three but I thought about him for a while.
  • 4 Weekend Hideaway – ran nicely in the Forego and before that won a couple of state bred affairs. Loves BEL, loves the distance, and has some consistent figures.
  • 5 Big Business – has been competitive all year, and is a 30% winner lifetime. He belongs in this group but I’m leaning in other directions for the win.
  • 6 Sandy’z Slew – I don’t understand the 30-1 ML; his last two were off the turf affairs and he actually won his last. I don’t think he is a world beater, but he is a hard trying horse that likes BEL.
  • 7 Moonlight Song – early speed specialist seems to thrive on the front end and is the best speed in here. If he gets a sensible pace, he can be a factor.
  • 8 John’s Island – doesn’t look good enough to win this one, but has a neat 4th place finish in the Amsterdam. Jimmy Jerkens has been ice cold at BEL but lately is showing signs of waking up.
  • 9 Leila’s Jazz – A competitive horse and his last was impressive but he looks like another that is only likely to catch a minor piece.
  • 10 Captain Serious – In seven starts he has shown a lot of talent although lately he seems to be a little heartless in the stretch. Still, I definitely think he he can be a threat here.
  • 11 Crafty Dearmer – just not fast enough to beat these.

Race 11

  • 5 Manoffire – Cuts back to the sprint distance and this is probably where he belongs. Steady works for his return. Lisa Lewis is 44% first time with a horse.
  • 11 Spider Roll – closed nicely in his debut at Presque Isle and got a nice number for that race. Now in the Steve Klesaris barn and he is 26% with first timers in his care. Hasn’t been on the turf but his breeding is fair for turf sprints.
  • 3 Runaway Posse – looked good first time on the turf. The cutback in distance should help. Improvement is expected here.
  • 8 Awesome Lute – claimed in his first two starts and switches to the turf for new trainer Schosberg. Also adds Lasix. Working decently off the mini-vacation.
Selections

Belmont October 17

Like the Who said, it’s another tricky day. Lots of racing competitive because of the talent or lack thereof.

Race 1     4-1-2

Race 2     5-2-3-6

Race 3     3-12-11-7

Race 4     5-8-4-6

Race 5     4-2-9

Race 6     2-1-9-8

Race 7     7-3-9-11

Race 8     (in-depth analysis race of the day)     4-8-1-3

  • 1 Rock Me Mama – Was claimed by Richard Metivier for $25K. He promptly jumped her up to $50K on the turf, a surface on which she has shown little talent. He then moved her to s 6F starter allowance on the dirt. In that contest she bobbled at the start and never got into the race. She’s not terribly misplaced in the ALW NW1X but she is 0 for 2 on the BEL dirt. I give her an outside chance here.
  • 2 Malibu Queeen – scratched
  • 3 Pebble Beach Baby – an interesting horse for high percentage trainer Ramon Preciado. She comes off a win at Parx in a $16K starter. She’s been well traveled, with races at SA, GG, OTP, and DMR as well as Parx with pretty fair success. She doesn’t have the pace figures of some in here, but she is very consistent. If she takes to the BEL surface, she could run to her 2-1 ML odds.
  • 4 Whispering – 3 year old filly broke her maiden early in the year at GP on the turf. While her three dirt starts haven’t resulted in a placing, her last race was a lot better than looked. The field that day was better than this field. The place and show horses both came back in their next out to win NW1X allowance races. At 6-1 on the ML she represents good value.
  • 5 Holiday’s Jewel – hasn’t showed much in her last three races; in fact, hasn’t shown a lot this year. A non-contender for me.
  • 6 Streethomealabama – Most recently has been racing in Kentucky. Was claimed out of her last race by low profile trainer William Heffner. She has only one win in 14 starts, but 8 seconds and thirds. At best, she gets a minor piece.
  • 7 Penthouse Party – claimed from her last by Oscar Barrera III. She hasn’t been fast enough lately, but does have a lot of tactical speed. While I’m not leaning in her direction, if she guns from the get-go she may have something to say at the end.
  • 8 Madaket Millie – ML favorite for Chad Brown, has not run at the sprint distance in her career. She finished within half a length of a strong allowance field at SAR but has tailed off in her last two. Two weeks ago at BEL she showed her normal early foot, but faded in the stretch. Still, no horse was beating Snowbell that day and she did run well enough on the dirt to get Brown to send her out for another try at a shorter distance.  Has a lot of upside, but definitely doesn’t look unbeatable.

Race 9     6-10-5-11

Selections

Belmont October 16

I handicapped the card assuming the turf races would stay on the turf. Unfortunately, I have some business to attend to so I won’t be able to re-handicap, so take this for what it is worth.

Race 1      8-3-1-5

Race 2     5-9-8-3

Race 3     3-1-8-2

Race 4     9-1-6-11

Race 5     8-6-3-7

Race 6     5-1-8-9

Race 7    8-4-6-5     (in-depth analysis race of the day)

  • 1 Indy Tune – was claimed by Oscar Barrera III two back for $20K and he immediately stepped him up to a $40K NW2X. He flopped in that race, although he had a troubled start. His figure is competitive, but he has not had success at the $32K level. I can’t see more than a minor award.
  • 2 Doc Almon – was claimed by Bruce Brown for $20K in August off a turf race where he ran a close third. He’s run two dirt races in $25K starter allowances and they look good enough for him to be competitive in this spot, but I expect his win prospects are not as good as others in here.
  • 3 Metaurus – has been running for $50K and drops a little today, but hasn’t been able to crack the winner’s circle in the last two years. Just doesn’t look fast enough to finish in the money.
  • 4 Bernie the Maestro – Last time he won it was on a sloppy track. In fact, in 9 starts on a wet track, he’s won 4. Has plenty of tactical speed and could take them all the way.
  • 5 Joan’s Choice – Ran a strong race for $20K last out. Jacobson left the horse in the barn, only giving him one workout three weeks ago. On the down side, he hasn’t won in seven tries at BEL, in fact finishing up the track in a 7F affair in the mud in July. Has a shot, not the best shot though.
  • 6 Regulus – has run two interesting races where he contested the pace early, dropped back and then came on again in the stretch. He  ran competitively at BEL in May. One for two on a wet track and figures in the mix.
  • 7 Back Forty – claimed last out by Falcone who has had one winner in three tries 1st off he claim. He’s been a useful horse, and his wet track rating is about as high as it ever gets, even though he is 0 for 2 in the moist going. I can’t see more than a minor award here.
  • 8 Royal Currier – The other Jacobson runner has been running with much better, winning a minor stakes at DEL in June. Two for six on the BEL dirt. No wins on a wet track, but has had two seconds in six tries. His last race in the mud at BEL he looked over his head so I wouldn’t downgrade him much. May go off the favorite and looks best to me.

Race 8    10-11-7-3

Race 9    1a-11-2-5

Opinions

TCO2 and Argenta

Until a few days ago, I didn’t know much about Total Carbon Dioxide (TCO2) and why it was anathema to racing commissions. So, if you haven’t had the time to research TCO2, let me help.

TCO2 is measured in something called millimoles per liter, expressed as mml/l or mmol/l. Here’s what wikipedia says about moles.

Mole is a unit of measurement used in chemistry to express amounts of a chemical substance, defined as the amount of any substance that contains as many elementary entities (e.g., atoms, molecules, ions, electrons) as there are atoms in 12 grams of pure carbon-12 (12C), the isotope of carbon with relative atomic mass of exactly 12 by definition. This corresponds to the Avogadro constant, which has a value of 6.02214129(27)×1023 elementary entities of the substance. It is one of the base units in the International System of Units; it has the unit symbol mol and corresponds with the dimension symbol N.[1] In honour of the unit, some chemists celebrate October 23 (a reference to the 1023 part of the Avogadro constant) as “Mole Day”.

Let me come clean and say I actually took (and passed) organic and inorganic chemistry in college, but if I ever knew what a mole was I’ve long since forgotten. And the definition above was pretty much lost on me. I’m still more than a little fuzzy on what a mole is. However, I do know a millimole is a thousandth of a mole. Most special is that next Thursday is mole day and I hope you all celebrate appropriately.

The widely used horseracing industry standard is 37 mmol/l of TCO2. As best as I can tell, the standard was set based on testing that showed the natural level of 99+% of horses was going to be below 37 mmol/l, even after the horse has been treated with Lasix. In a natural habitat, TCO2 should be between 26 and 32 mmol/l. When horses are fed with commercially collected grasses and grains (hay, oats, etc.) and are given electrolytes and pellets that may have additional elements, the TCO2 level will move upward to 33 mmol/l or so. In fact, based on testing, “natural” levels of race horses are rarely going to be above about 35 mmol/l, even if they have been treated with Lasix. The CHRB cites that prior to adoption of a standard of 37mmol/l up to 20% of races horses tested above that level, but after adoption of that standard the percentage was essentially 0. They clearly state over and over, a level above 37mmol/l has to be the result of something the trainer did (e.g., feed) or didn’t do (e.g., not giving the horse water).

The critical question is whether an elevated TCO2 level is in fact performance enhancing. In the decision by the CHRB, they say

“The theory is that by raising the TCO2 level, you can reduce the build-up of lactic acid that occurs during a race. In essence the build-up of lactic acid that causes muscle fatigue is neutralized and performance is enhanced. Whether performance is actually enhanced is the subject of debate, with the Board taking the position that elevated TCO2 is a performance enhancer and O’Neill arguing that this proposition is unproven.”

So what we know are two things:

  • that 37 mmol/l does not seem to occur naturally, even in racehorses, and
  • it may or may not have a performance enhancing effect.

Let me give you two quotes from the Australian Harness Racing Council report presented in 2000:

“A horse that is scientifically trained or well-trained cannot be improved very much by the administration of alkinizing agents.”

When they refer to alkinizing agents, they mean “MILKSHAKES.” The report goes on to say

“In North American tests in 1996 it was found that some horses performed worse when administered with a buffering substance or an alkinizing agent.”

The CHRB cites testimony from Dr. Rick Arthur, the CHRB Equine Medical Director, and Dr. Scott Stanley, a PhD toxicologist from the U C Davis laboratory that did the testing, that indicated TCO2 levels above the 37.0 mmol/l could result in an improved effort. Their testimony solidified the CHRB opinion that elevated TCO2 is a performance enhancer.

What we’re not completely sure about is, even if elevated TCO2 is present, at what level does real performance enhancement occur? 37.1mmol/l? 40mmol/l? 50mmol/l? Remember, the standard wasn’t set based on knowing the level at which performance enhancement is sure to occur. It’s based on a level that a race horse should never exceed, even allowing for Lasix, food, or other medications, with a presumption that 37mmol/l is, in fact, performance enhancing.

The Michigan Office of Racing Commissioner uses something called a Radiometer to test horses pre-race, and they clearly state

“Although there are a variety of factors that can lead to elevated TCO2 levels in a horse, the Radiometer can only test for the level of TCO2, not for “baking soda” or whatever other factors may have caused an elevated level. For that reason, a TCO2 “overage” does not necessarily imply that a trainer has “milkshaked” a particular horse, but simply that the horse tested had an elevated level of TCO2 in its system at the point in time when it was tested.”

In order to tell if a horse has been milkshaked, the testing lab must look for elevated levels of sodium and chloride. In the case of Argenta, the CHRB found normal levels of both sodium and chloride and concluded

“We adopt these facts and opinions [regarding sodium and chloride levels] and hold that the filly Argenta was not milkshaked with a NaHCO3 solution prior to the August 25, 2010 race at Del Mar.”

It all gets subtle at this point. We have a theory of performance enhancement and some level of disagreement whether that is generally occurring. But the critical point is that a rule is a rule, and even if you think it is a stupid or even unconstitutional rule, if a trainer breaks the rule he can be found guilty. The CHRB made this clear in their decision

We find that the filly, Argenta, trained by Doug O’Neill, ran in the 6th race at Del Mar Racetrack on August 25, 2010 with an excessive amount of TCO2 in her system (39.4 mm/l). Nothing further is necessary to establish a prima facie case under rules 1843.6 and 1887. Therefore the burden has now shifted to Respondent to prove his Due Process Defense by a preponderance of the evidence.”

In less formal language O’Neill was DOA unless he could prove he either didn’t have anything to do with causing the elevated TCO2 level, or the testing was bogus. Since O’Neill didn’t contest the testing, it came down to proving he was denied due process.

The beginning of the case was really about milkshaking, and O’Neill was sure the horse hadn’t been milkshaked This gave him a strong motivation to protest his innocence. However, it became clear that even if the horse wasn’t milkshaked (English is a great for turning nouns into verbs) the TCO2 level was going to be enough to find him in violation. Fighting the CHRB on due process grounds was always going to be an uphill struggle.

“The Attorney General has pointed out that the present standard for evaluating a due process challenge is the “rational basis test.” A law is Constitutional if it is rationally related to a proper legislative goal…Respondent agrees that a law must be found to be irrational before it may be found to be Unconstitutional. Furthermore the law will be upheld even if it is unwise and results in some inequality. Those challenging the constitutionality of a law must carry the heavy burden of negating every conceivable basis which might support the law even if not found in the record.”

The chances of O’Neill winning the case were clearly slim. O’Neill argued that the Board failing to account for the Lasix Bump (described in more detail below) and failing to provide a TCO2 quarantine barn made 1843.6 irrational on its face. The CHRB ultimately rejected this argument.

Let’s talk about the factors that can lead to elevated TCO2 testing.

Lasix: It is well known that the diuretic Lasix can impact TCO2 levels, and trainers should adjust the dosage to ensure the so called “Lasix bump” does not occur. The Lasix bump was one of the arguments Doug O’Neill used in the case of Argenta.  In their decision the CHRB said

“Some jurisdictions impose a two-tier system where the few non-Lasix horses are limited to 37.0 mm/l [sic] and Lasix horses are allowed up to 39.0 mm/l [sic] of TCO2. The Board has chosen not to adopt this two tier system. 

In other words, Lasix indisputably bumps TCO2, but in the opinion of the CHRB the standard of 37 mmol/l is sufficient to take that into account.

We know Doug O’Neill’s vet, Dr. Joseph Dowd, administered a 10cc shot of Lasix approximately 40 minutes before the race. 10cc is the maximum legal amount a horse may be given before a race. Nobody contends any of this, but what is interesting is the CHRB language characterizing the injection of Lasix.

“We find that it was at O’Neill’s instruction that Argenta was given the 10cc shot of Lasix…”

I’m not sure the CHRB meant this, but a literal reading of the sentence was that O’Neill not only ordered the shot, he specified the dosage. O’Neills story is that he trusts his vet to properly administer medications, including Lasix, and in this case the vet apparently saw no problem with administering that dosage of Lasix, something he had done hundreds of times. There was no testimony that Dr. Dowd was forced to inject the horse, merely asked to administer it based on normal and legal pre-race medication procedures. The clear conclusion by the CHRB was that if there was a Lasix bump, O’Neill was in full control of Argenta’s medication and was thereby responsible.

Dehydration: Dehydration may lead to metabolic alkalosis, which in turn can result in an elevated TCO2 level. In the case of Argenta, she was vanned over from Hollywood Park on what the CHRB called an “extremely hot day.” Race day was also very hot. There was not specific evidence that dehydration caused the high level of TCO2, but it made no difference. O’Neill was in control of the horse, its transportation and its watering and that was enough to put the blame on him for the elevated TCO2 level.

Supplements: Any supplement can alter the blood chemistry of a horse, primarily those containing bicarbonate, citrate and acetate.

Medications: Buffers, antacids and anti-ulcer medications can raise TCO2 levels. There did not seem to be any testimony related to medications other than Lasix.

Feed: Diets that have a high carbon anion balance, for example alfalfa and soybean meal, can cause elevated TCO2. Once again, no one argued that the elevated level in Argenta was due to feed, but even if they did, it made no difference. O’Neill was in charge of the horse’s diet and if that was the cause it was O’Neill’s fault.

Electrolytes and Salt: It was a hot day. If you are exercising on a hot day, you lose electrolytes, and you drink beverages that would replace them, Gatorade for example. Again, it doesn’t matter with regard to a violation – if giving a horse Gatorade raises its TCO2 level, the trainer is in violation even if he did it out of caring for the horse.

We can debate the need for TCO2 rules in light of research that says it may or may not improve the performance of a race horse. It would be a stretch to consider the CHRB ruling as definitive of anything more than they adopted the rule, they found the rule necessary, and Doug O’Neill violated the rule. The CHRB stated

“We rejected Respondent’s well-argued due process defense primarily because of the overwhelming evidence that California trainers in general and Mr. O’Neill in particular have learned various ways to manipulate TCO2 scores without serving milkshakes.”

So according to the CHRB, trainers are purposely looking to elevate TCO2 levels. But then they go on to say

“We still cannot say it was done here intentionally. Frankly Argenta was a very poor candidate for TCO2 manipulation. According to Dr. Arthur and Dr. Stanley, the prime subject for raising TCO2 levels is a male horse running in quality races and finishing in the money. In other words the polar opposite of Argenta. She was a Filly running in the cheapest claiming races and falling so far back “she would need to sprout wings” to catch the leaders.”

At least it looks like someone at the CHRB has heard Trevor Denman call a race.

So which is it? O’Neill thought he would outsmart the CHRB or he was just flying too close to the sun without meaning to do that? The CHRB was basically saying, if a trainer is going to raise TCO2 levels he’s going to do it on a horse that already had a good chance of winning in the hope he’ll get the horse over the top.

The CHRB concluded O’Neill didn’t appear to intentionally try to elevate Argenta’s TCO2 levels. While it may have been puzzling O’Neill chose Argenta for elevated TCO2 levels, the only motive the CHRB speculated on was his own stubbornness. They said

“Perhaps it was his failure to heed Dr. Arthur’s warning that his training methods were leaving him too few standard deviations to the maximum allowed TCO2 line.”

The CHRB assured themselves they were making the right decision by noting Argenta’s TCO2 levels dropped to 29.75 mmol/l after O’Neill was notified about the violation. Such a dramatic shift had to mean O’Neill was looking to elevate TCO2 levels, even without milkshaking.

There is a continuum that can be applied to all trainers that they fall somewhere between those who constantly push the envelope by looking for an advantage and those who are conservative to a fault.  There are those who are operating with full knowledge about how their actions will affect racehorse performance. There are also those who are frankly not paying as close attention as they should. Say what you will about Doug O’Neill, but any conclusion about where he falls is going to have some speculation in there.

Opinions

Follow Up From the Thoroughbred Daily News Op-Ed

The other day Bill Finley at the Thoroughbred Daily News wrote a piece on how the CHRB dealt with the Doug O’Neill situation with regard to his suspension for a violation involving the anxiety-calming medication Oxazepam. For the most part it was a scathing indictment of the California Horse Racing Board (CHRB) for what Finley characterized as a farce for how they responded to O’Neill’s suspension by the New York State Gaming Commission.

The primary issue was that O’Neill had been assigned a 180 day suspension by the CHRB, 135 days of which were suspended pending   he did not receive any violations for Class 1, 2 , or 3 substances. Finley argued that the violation in New York fell within the probationary period and the CHRB made, in Finley’s words, a “dumb decision.” At the end of his piece he made the blanket indictment of O’Neill as a trainer who doesn’t play by the rules.

Finley is certainly entitled to his opinion. Many bloggers (including me) have fired off pieces based on something we read or an opinion we hold. But as long as we are expressing opinions, I don’t believe Mr. Finley did anyone any favors by concluding the CHRB is a group of “Bureaucrats who may or may not be qualified for the job, they didn’t have the stomach for a fight,” even if a lot of us might agree with him. There is a lot more to the story than bumbling bureaucrats.

Regardless of O’Neill’s reputation, the fact is that an opinion piece that doesn’t include any conversations with the principals involved has to be viewed as incomplete for assessing reality. Whether or not Finley hit the nail on the head when he said, “No doubt O’Neill hired some very good lawyers who went into the CHRB and said that if they didn’t reduce O’Neill’s penalties they were going to make life a living hell for them,” certainly would have been easy enough to verify. It’s one of the things I hope to find out from the people involved.

Let’s talk a little about why O’Neill was suspended for 180 days in the first place.

O’Neill was suspended for a violation on a horse called Argenta that ran in the 6th race at Del Mar on August 25, 2010, finishing 8th. For whatever reason, O’Neill’s horse was tested and was found to have a total carbon dioxide level of 39.4 mml/l against a standard of 37 mml/l. I don’t have a background in chemistry or biochemistry, but I did look up mml on Google, and they seemed convinced I meant mmol, or millimoles per liter.

I called a good friend of mine who is a chemist, and she tried to explain millimoles to me. It has something to do with measuring molecules, but I hung up about as confused as I started.

She asked me a lot of questions. Things like, are the standards set with a margin of safety? Does the point at which the sample is taken affect the carbon dioxide level? For example, would the CO2 level vary if the sample was taken before the race, right after the race, or an hour after the race? I asked if 2.4 millimoles was a significant overage, but clearly you need more context than I could give. I really have no clue what the answers are and it will take some digging to figure it out.

To cut to the chase, the CHRB, at least some of whom are no more expert in chemistry than I am, basically said it doesn’t matter when the sample was taken – it was over the legal limit. Sort of like if you blew into a breathalyzer and it read over the legal limit. At that point, you have a presumption of guilt. The difference is that you can go to court and argue your case based on various grounds, and you might be found not guilty, in which case you won’t wind up with a record. But in horseracing, you are presumed guilty because of the absolute insurers rule, and unless you could prove something that would negate the testing there would be no wiggling out of it, and even in that case (see my blog on Wind of Bosphorus) the trainer can be found guilty and punished.

O’Neill filed a federal lawsuit that asked the court to enjoin (prohibit) CHRB from taking any legal action against him pending a resolution of his federal court action, which was dismissed by the district court on April 11, 2011. The case was ultimately referred to an independent hearing officer.

The hearing officer conducted seven days of testimony at Del Mar between August and October 2011 with final briefings given to the hearing officer in March 2012.

The hearing officer rendered his decision on April 30, 2012. The CHRB met in executive session on May 24 and decided to announce its decision, including the findings of the hearing officer that there had been no “milkshaking” and that O’Neill had not committed any intentional acts. Still, O’Neill was still deemed accountable for the condition of the horse under the absolute insurer rule and was in violation of that rule.

Let’s go back to Bill Finley’s complaint. First, it’s pretty clear that “efficient” could not be used to describe the process of adjudicating violations. It took almost two years to come to resolution on the Argenta case and over a year to come to resolution on the Wind of Bosphorus case. But the real issue in the Argenta case is that O’Neill was punished after a federal hearing officer, after a full suite of testimony, basically exonerated him. And in the case of Wind of Bosphorus, there were a lot of questions that didn’t have to be answered because of the absolute insurers rule.

As I mentioned, Mr. Finley speculated, “No doubt O’Neill hired some very good lawyers who went into the CHRB and said that if they didn’t reduce O’Neill’s penalties they were going to make life a living hell for them.” Mr. Finley didn’t mention exactly how O’Neill would do that, but the last time he stood up to them (with Argenta) it cost him $440,000. That’s a pretty clear case of losing for winning. And frankly, I don’t think any of the CHRB commissioners had anxiety attacks that might need benzodiazepines because O’Neill decided to fight. Now like Mr. Finley, I’m speculating about that, although I was staff to a state commission in a previous life and the only real threat anybody had was to lobby the governor not to reappoint them, assuming they were trying to make a career as a commissioner. Now if Mr. Finley had said, given the fact that the commission basically punished O’Neill for a transgression he was found by a federal hearing officer to have not committed, perhaps the commission figured they didn’t want to make looking foolish an annual event, I would have expressed rousing agreement.

So I did send a response to Mr. Finley, which he indicated would be published by Thoroughbred Daily News. To this point it hasn’t been. There were other responses that were published. Mostly it seemed like they praised the opinions of Mr. Finley and Bill Oppenheimer who published a letter to the WHOA supporting discontinuation of raceday medication. You can read them for yourself and draw your own conclusions by going to the Thoroughbred Daily News web site.

I said in my last blog piece, Bill Finley makes some important points. On an academic level, I agree that real serial scofflaws should suffer serious penalties. And I also agree the qualifications of some people on racing commissions are deplorable. The point he didn’t make was that as long as commissioners cannot judge rule violations beyond the absolute insurers rule, the whole system is ripe for abuse.

Let me leave you with this question. Knowing just the basic details of the Argenta and Wind of Bosphorus cases, if you were in Doug O’Neill’s shoes, would it be appropriate for you to banned from making a living for six months or six years?

Selections

Belmont October 13

In the last three days one of my selections has won 24 of 29 races at BEL. I hope to keep the magic working today.

Race 1      2-6-4

Race 2     2-9-7

Race 3     4-3-1

Race 4     10-2-5-7

Race 5     6-3-4-9

Race 6     4-6-3-12

Race 7     The Punkin Pie      2-4-8-6

  • 1 Thetaloveandmine – scratched
  • 2 Katie’s Garden – Speedster is one for one at the distance and hasn’t been out of the money in her career. John Sherriffs is not having a very good year, but this horse has accounted for a chunk of his success. Has a nice series of workouts in the last two weeks. Johnny V stays aboard.
  • 3 Classic Point – Puts the blinkers on for Jimmy Jerkens who has been having a horror of a BEL meet. Five year old has been a bit over her head in graded stakes this year. She runs best pressing close to the pace and I’d look for Irad to try that tactic today. May not be the fastest horse, but in not without a chance.
  • 4 Wildcat Lily – Rudy Rodriguez has been having a spectacular meet, and brings this one in off a prep at Parx after laying off for five months. That race should set her up nicely. One of the main contenders.
  • 5 Risky Rachel – scratched
  • 6 Unbound – Japanese invader makes his stateside debut for Graham Motion who is 30% with debuting foreign horses. Really was not more than an allowance horse, but given the size of Japanese fields and the fact he was generally in the top three finishers, the horse appears to have plenty of heart.  Definitely the X factor here; hard to use him, hard to ignore him
  • 7 Rock Me Mama – scratched
  • 8 Voodoo Tales – horse has been running with lower quality animals – $20K starter allowance, ALW NW1X. Still her last two races showed some good talent and she seems hard to leave off your tickets.

Race 8     12-7-9-6

Race 9     The Pebbles     11-4-8-9

  • 1 Cash For Ever – made a tremendous close in his first start in America, only to fall short by one and three quarters. Perhaps she will do better with a little more ground to cover. Would be no surprise to see her do well in this group, but I’m going to look elsewhere for the top spot.
  • 2 Hot and Spicy – James Bond brings her in from Canada where she was running in restricted stakes. She looks a step or two slower than the best in here.
  • 3 Secret Someone – Broke her maiden, laid off for five months and came back to win her NW1X. May blossom in the future, but I’m not sure the future is today.
  • 4 Lady Lara – been running in England where she was graded stakes placed.  It’s clear she wasn’t Group 1 quality, but she does seem to be a mile specialist. Mott has had a good BEL meeting. One of the contenders.
  • 5 Distorted Beauty – Hasn’t done anything wrong this year and may outrun her odds, but she’ll have to show she can run with this kind before I’ll back her.
  • 6 Walk Close – Another that should like the mile distance. She was only two and a half behind Ball Dancing who came back to run second in the QE II at Keeneland. Improving horses are always dangerous and Clement has been training up a storm. Another that wouldn’t be a total shock.
  • 7 Ubiquitous Mantle – Still looking to win a NW1X. Just doesn’t look the caliber of these other runners.
  • 8 Kenzadargent – Chad Brown trainee is two for two since shipping from France.  Yes, she’s stepping up but she is multiple group placed. She is a major danger today.
  • 9 Sandiva – didn’t break well in the San Clemente at Del Mar but before that she was winning Group 3 races in France and England. I’m sticking with the Euros in this race and Sandiva is one of the contenders.
  • 10 Munriah – three start horse for Graham Motion. Another that could be better as time goes on, but she needs to prove to me she can run with these types.
  • 11 Indian Rainbow – last of the Euro invaders. Clement has been very successful with horses making their first start in America. Runs pretty much exclusively at the mile distance. She’ll be my choice in here.

Race 10     3-6-10-12

 

Selections

Belmont October 12

Another day where I’ll just do the detailed analysis of the feature. Lots of things going on as I’ve gotten well into the Doug O’Neill case. I still managed eight of ten with all but one of the turf races off the turf yesterday.

Race 1       5-8-2     OFF TURF   4-1

Race 2      9-3-7-5

Race 3      3-8-2-7    OFF TURF 5-3-6-7

Race 4      6-3-2-4

Race 5      3-9-5-8

Race 6      6-1a-10-8

Race 7      12-8-10-7

Race 8      1a-6-3

Race 9      The Athenia     Grade 3     1-12-2-5

  • 1 Overheard – Winner of the Grade 3 Dance Smartly at WO in July; has never finished out of the money. Ran a closing third at FG on the soft turf. I talked a little about trainer Malcolm Pierce yesterday, and to remind you he has a 26% win rate with stock that is primarily running at the highest levels in Canada. Up With the Birds ran a bang-up race yesterday in the Knickerbocker and there is no reason to expect less from this runner.
  • 2 La Tia – should be the speed in the race – only once in the last 10 has she not had the lead at the first call. I still think the track will be tiring but she has won on less than firm turf and has had success at longer distances than today’s 1 1/16 mile race. Not a lot of other speed to push her here so remains dangerous.
  • 3 Embarr – has run well in non-graded stakes events, Doesn’t look talented enough to run with this group.
  • 4 Byrama – hasn’t had the best 2014 but her last race was her best. Still, she isn’t likely to wrest the lead away from La Tia and that is how she managed to finish second. I’m leaning toward others.
  • 5 Julie’s Love – two starts this year for Graham Motion. Hasn’t run badly on the soft turf but even off her best looks like no more than a minor slice.
  • 6 Teen Pauline – MTO scratch
  • 7 It’s My Time – really looks overmatched her. Frankly, all she can do is screw up the early pace.
  • 8 Nashly’s Vow – scratch
  • 9 Maximova – is not completely outless, but hasn’t run against graded company in over a year and that effort was dull. Hard to put her in the money.
  • 10 Baffle Me – Definitely a contender but hasn’t finished in the money in four tries this year. Also hasn’t won at the distance. Looks at best slated for a minor award.
  • 11 Cushion – has never really run fast enough to beat a graded group. Despite the presence of Clement it’s a stretch to see her winning.
  • 12 Annecdote – The other Clement trainee. Shipped from England in July and under Clement’s handling (and the addition of Lasix) won the Noble Damsel in a good time. Definitely a Grade 2/3 runner and one probably the one to beat.

Race 10    3-4-9-11