Mark Cramer
C & X Report

C&X 35

CONTENTS
Editorial
Wounds
Research follow-up: the Informed Minority
Inside the Informed Minority, from Steve Klein
Jerry and Morty: Review
Review of The Big Horse
C&X Café
Postscript: The Butterfly Effect
Also-Eligible Vacations: Japan
Postscript

POSTSCRIPT:
LIVE RACING
I remember sitting up high in the M section of the Santa Anita grandstand. It was the best place to view the race, midstretch so that you could see ‘em coming around the turn and could visualize which horses would have the most gas for the stretch drive.
The rich, dark texture of the racing strip could have been labelled The Good Earth.
At any moment, you could walk through the tunnel under the stretch and picnic in the infield. I used to enjoy walking all the way to the backstretch side of the infield and watching sprinters burst out of the gate. I also enjoyed walking out of the track up to the starting gate of the downhill turf course, and watching pastel silks and shiny coats explode into a work of abstract expressionism.
Then there was Clockers’ Corner, where you could have a good old greasy spoon breakfast, watch the workouts, and say hello to trainers and riders. Had a great chat with Joy Scott one morning and wrote up the interview. All this with the haze lifting in the distance and baring the San Gabriel Mountains.
Am I being anachronistic in hoping that this tradition can somehow be resuscitated. The last time I visited Santa Anita, the M section and beyond in the grandstand was roped off. Not enough people. Charles Bukowski’s hangout in the upper tier above Clockers Corner was empty.
There are still some tracks where I can hang on to the old feel of live racing. Canterbury Park is one of them, and of course, Saratoga. At one time or another I enjoyed live racing at Gulfstream, Tampa Bay, Laurel, Pimlico, Charles Town, Penn National, the Meadowlands, Belmont, Aqueduct, Saratoga, Finger Lakes, Arlington, Hawthorne, the old Sportsmans Park, Fairmount, Hollywood Park, Santa Anita, Los Alamitos, Fairplex, Caliente, Albuquerque, and so many other tracks, some elegant, others dumpy but trendy, others just plain dumpy, and others where you could take in the urban landscape or smell the nearby cows in the fields.
Tell me the truth. Do you get the same thrill booting up your computer to watch the races as you would walking through the tunnel that opened up by the rail, and looking at the toteboard shine with the morning line odds of the first race of the day? Is it possible that beautiful Hialeah is defunct? Will polytracks forever change the landscape of the game? People know that the Big Screen is better than the TV and people still read books even when they can get them on the internet. Can Kentucky save the tradition? Or maybe Texas? Tell us about live racing in your part of the woods.



EDITORIAL:
PLETCHER AND ME
When Satwa Queen, my only A horse in the Breeders' Cup, was unable to confirm her European class in the BC Fillies & Mares, I stared ahead at a card full of choices of "D" and "C" insight. I emerged from the day battered and bruised, like an investor in technology stocks in the year 2000, but I did follow my script and go lightly, as should be the case with non-A horses.
Given the fact that you could make an argument for virtually every horse in the Mile and the Distaff, I considered that pick 3s were out of the question. I was alive on a late double with David Junior, Suave and Lawyer Ron, but at that moment, I feared that I would be one of Lawyer Ron's final clients.
If the day was brutal, the night was grindingly depressing, as I was obligated to "face my ledger," which for a horseplayer is equivalent to facing one's maker. Had I not been a record keeper, I could have been deluded. I could have imagined that thanks to scores like Cash Included at SA and the "German trifecta" for the Arlington Million, my bottom line would be positive.
But now, it appears that I may end up the year on the loss side. In 2005, I had had my best year ever percentagewise. Playing very selectively, I achieved an r.o.i. that made me feel invincible. Traditionally, December is a good month, so I'm still near enough to the so-called "break-even" point to harbor some hope. But for the first time in the years of C&X, I can announce to the readers that I have a losing bottom line.
Pletcher is another guy who blanked during the Breeders' Cup, and I suspected that he would. However, his bottom line remains positive. His cycle usually peaks in August and his record from a player's standpoint is not so admirable once the foliage turns orange and yellow.
If I wanted to engage in some creative accounting, I could combine the years 2005 and 2006 and still proclaim myself a winner. The figures would back me up. But I am a fiscal year man and my accounting system requires me to face the truth on an annual basis.
From time to time, the conscious horseplayer should consider whether or not his or her methods require a change with the times. Thus far, I think not. I hope that the BC drubbing is merely a question of circumstance. I wouldn't expect Pletcher to change his training methods either. Though if you follow designer trainers and jockeys, you can see that there are cycles, and just when a dependable star seems to be forever shining, a new one will replace him. That's why I don't get as concerned as Andrew Beyer about any outfit "buying" racing. Beyer was referring to the Dubai horsemen, but we have seen in the past that owners come and go and few hold their own over the long run, money or no money. Where are Lukas's former owners, for example?
And speaking of cycles, what about C&X? How long can a print newsletter remain in the game during the age of the internet? Are we an anachronism? Should we change our methodology? Is my love of paper ill-founded? Paper can be recycled, so the issue is not ecological.
I guess the theme is: when should a man change his method? For the time being, the core will remain the same, but C&X and yours truly will continuously be on the lookout for new ideas. One of the old ideas, as expressed by one of our loyal readers, Don A, remains true. If we cannot eliminate half the field, then we should not be betting into a race. The Breeders' Cup seems to be an exception, because it is a time when we are all supposed to have fun. For a brief moment, I "had fun" considering that I was backing horses than none of the experts even mentioned. Following the bad results, I can assure you that I will continue to back outlandish horses. Having backed Arcangues, the big Euro winner of a BC Classic, I can not turn around and say it was a bad strategy backing David Junior. I can say that when a player is so far off from the mainstream, he will have to accept that there are going to be losing runs before the bright one appears on the horizon and passes over dropping its sparkles.
Further adding to the exceptional nature of the Breeders' Cup, I was able to throw out false and vulnerable favorites throughout the card. This uusually leads to winning at the races. But throwing out the favorite in a 13-horse field in which 9 of those horses have a relatively equal chance to win will little difference whatsoever.
I have slept worse after winning days, because those were days when I could have achieved early retirement if I had bet the right way. I slept well enough following BC 2006, for looking back, with the possible exception of Red Rocks, there is nothing I could have done differently. Except "the informed minority" (see below).

WOUNDS
One of the tests of a horseplayer is the ability to recover from a deep wound. This BC reminded me of another losing battle in my betting life, but one that left a much deeper wound. Mike Helm and I were playing as partners in a tournament at Sam's Town. I always need a partner, for I can never find ten worthy plays in a day, and the tournament required us to play ten races.
The tournament rules were virtually identical to those of the old Cal-Neva affair, an event I participated in five times. You go in with $500 real money. Each of the ten races per day required 10% of your bankroll, straight pools only. Each day your accounts are tabulated and the next day you play 10%. This means that your bet increases when you're winning. The grueling tournament lasted four days. A 4-day parlay of this type would be considered too bold a strategy by reasonable money management experts.
Each day offered a prize for the highest profit of the day among the usual 220 or 230 contestants. I had won this consolation prize on two occasions at the Cal-Neva, once with Helm and another time with a different partner.
In typical Cramer style, I had a neat flat-bet profit but no glory. My highest finishes were fifth and seventh, I had tapped out on one occasion, and on another occasion, I nearly tapped out on the third day when a winner was not allowed because we had not seen an erroneous the key punched ticket, and assumed that our correctly written ticket would have been punched in correctly. The horse won but we did not collect. On that occasion, we battled back on the final day of the tournament, from a big loss to a breakeven, and nearly caught the highest profit of the day.
At Sam's Town we played conservatively on day one, protecting our bankroll. On day two we hit two longshots, one of them which I picked (a Lord of War horse on the grass at 16-1) and another that Helm picked (a first-timer with a good debut sire-and-trainer at over 20-1). We came out with the highest profit of the day, and were well-placed in fifth place.
That night I slept poorly. It is never easy to sleep when you go directly from intense study of the past performances into an intended reverie. More difficult for me is the hotel situation. I need a place where I can open a window. I need fresh air. I realized that sleeping well was part of the winning strategy, but I couldn't handle the recycled hotel air. If I had had my own wheels, I would have gone down to the parking lot and slept in the car with an open window.
On the third day, my reactions were a few notches slower. It was not the right time to slow down. Neither of us had come up with any A horses, and we knew that we'd have to improvise by playing the toteboard, and that required quick thinking.
We were already down four bets of the ten, and these were large bets, considering our profits from the previous day. We had five more horses penciled in as possible plays, and one remaining free play, since between the two of us we could only find nine playable races. I found a route race at Churchill where there appeared to be little early speed. I scanned the running lines and discovered a sprinter stretching out. I liked the fact that this sprinter had improved his speed when going from six to seven furlongs.
This seemed worthy of a choice for the one open race we had. I tried to put my head together. I discussed the horse with Mike and we agreed that at 35-1, he was a good play. There were no betting windows in the large room. Tables had been set up with clerks to receive our bets.
The horses were milling around in front of the starting gate and there was only one person in front of me in line. He took awhile to do his bets. It appeared as if he was putting in all his tournament bets at once. Still I got in front of the clerk on time and I called out the number of our horse.
"Sorry," she said. "We cannot take your bet."
I looked back at the monitors. The horses were still loading.
"You still have time to put it in," I explained, panicky.
"Too late," she explained, calmly. "Tournament rules state that no bets can be taken after the first horse has loaded into the gate."
I got back to our table and explained to Mike what had happened. We were in time to watch the start of the race. Our horse got out to a quick early lead, and the pace looked slow. He went on as if he were prancing in the park. In the stretch, he drew off to win rather easily.
He paid $77 to win. No would-haves, could-haves or should-haves here. Neither Mike nor I could bare to mention that this horse could have put us on top in the tournament.
The rest of the day was catastrophic. We collected on two small payoffs, but our bankroll had been depleted.
It was at this moment that I realized that I had lost a good deal of my competitiveness. I had lost the will to fight back. For the fourth and final day, it was no use making wild stabs, but also no use to play conservatively either. Mentally, we were both defeated.
On the fourth day, we tapped out.
We left the hotel having doubled our money, thanks to the prize on day two, so we should have taken it ok. And yet I had never felt as down about racing as at this particular moment. I watched sagebrush swirl in meaningless spirals in empty lots near the hotel. To this very day, I have not entered another tournament.
On the other hand, perhaps from the sense of hotel imprisonment, I have developed a renewed love for live racing. I love to watch the workouts in the morning, and hang out at the rail during the afternoon. The more fresh air around me, the greater my attentiveness and the sharper my decision making.
In fact, I wonder if I am beginning to "think" like a horse, unconsciously oversensitive to my environment. If you believe in the "horse for course" theory then perhaps it makes sense to believe that a horseplayer can also function better in one venue than another.
With the fresh air, the wounds of that day have healed, but I have learned to avoid the type of situation that could result in a similar misadventure. Like avoiding negative people, I can also avoid negative scenarios that stimulate a bad memory.

BC SUBPLOT
The BC subplot that won't be covered elsewhere is the fate of the great Cristophe Soumillon. Mr. Soumillon inherited mounts on two horses that should not have been in the BC, and another with ominous probabilities, and he accepted these mounts graciously, perhaps knowing later on that they would owe him one.
Mr. Rouget's Germance would ordinarily have been a pick of mine. But Rouget typically wins at an extremely high percentage, the best in France, but mainly early in the season, and never at the top echelon. This particular trainer cycle did not bode well for Germance. The other two Soumillon horses should not have been in the BC.
Librettist had been rejected by Dettori, his regular rider. Probably the best miler in the world, Librettist had come out lame from his previous race, and everything pointed to the fact that he had reached the end of his season. Then there was Hurricane Run, obviously no longer the same horse, one that was considered at the end of his career. His trainer, André Fabre, let everyone know that he was against the participation of Hurricane Run by announcing that he was not going to Churchill Downs. Following HR's only career out-of-the-money finish, Soumillon graciously went over the race for the French TV racing channel. Mr. Soumillon had ridden Shirocco to victory in the previous BC Turf, for Fabre and for us as well. Unlike other riders, Soumillon talks with the media win or lose. He is still a very young man, but more mature than most of us.
Though not ridden by Soumillon, there was another horse that should not have been entered , at least not in the Classic. George Washington, who represented a certain contingent of horses who were present only because, and I paraphrase: "We have nothing to lose. A win would boost his stud fee, and a loss would not detract from his turf record." We certainly have to be aware, as bettors, about wealthy owners who are gambling as much as any player, and not allow them to gamble with our money.

RESEARCH: THE INFORMED MINORITY
I've tabulated the informed minority picks from the DRF handicappers grid. It was a dizzying job. There were 22 occasions withing BC races when only one DRF handicapper picked a horse. Of those 22 there were two winners, for less than a 10% hit rate.
Again and again, I hesitate to plug this system because I know that the hit rate is below what can be considered comfortable for most players. If you had decided to play this method for BC 2006, you would have gone through 8 losers before the first winner, and knowing most folk, they would become discouraged after 4 or 5 losers.
However, once again, amazingly, there was a flat-bet profit. In $2 accounting language, there was $44 invested with a return of $83.80. The two winners were:
Thor's Echo at $33.20 (picked by Klein)
Miesque's Approval at $50.60 (picked by Tuley)
There were also two double-figure place horses that had been informed-minority picks, both Graham Motion horses. They were Film Maker, picked by Welsh in the F&M, and Better Talk Now, chosen by Grening in the Turf.
In order to consider whether it could be feasible to invest in a system with such a low win percentage, but one that seems to come through again and again, we should ask why this thing works. Is it a fluke that has been continuing, like a love affair based on an infatuation, like a flame that will eventually die out? Or is there some intrinsic reason why such a thing should continue in the long term.
If we go back to a different research project, on several occasions, C&X tabulated hundreds of longshot winners (thousands if you count the previous workouts from past years). For each longshot winner, the pps were examined, and the reasons were sought for the win. This was then compared with a Control involving the reasons for winning favorites.
The result was that there were very few reasons why favorites won. Usually there was a speed, pace or class advantage. Period.
On the other hand, for longshots, there were nearly as many "reasons" as there were longshot winners. Well, excuse me, I exaggerate to make a point. But yes, there seems to be an infinite number of reasons, for with each research sample, new reasons appear. The pattern match alone has hundreds of variations. Why did I pick the Craig Dollase winner at Oak Tree at 29.40. In that case, it was the upward progression of Beyer figures and a vague recollection of the trainer popping previously with a similar 2-year-old situation. The Beyer fig reason is not frequent for me, in fact.
So if more reasons make for more longshot winners, then why shouldn't we all try to become multiple handicappers, or players with multiple handicapping personalities? Not so easy for one old dog to become many new ones.
But here precisely is where the informed minority enters the picture. The "Informed Minority" method is picking the brain of many wise people. These are wise people who are often not so wise. But the informed minority picks them out when they are at the height of wisdom, or also the height of madness. Wisdom and madness, the winning combination for a multiple-minded system. That's my hypothesis as to why the informed minority does indeed work well, but also why, because of the madness, that it does not have a high win percentage.
Your opinions are welcomed. Would you be willing to back a method with good winning credentials that has a low win percentage? Could you stick it out during the inevitable losing streaks?
Thanks to Don A for his research on individual handicapper performance with the Informed Minority? Three handicappers came out with profits. There was Welsh, with 53 races and a profit of 11 cents on the dollar, Gropper, with 56 races and a 15 cent profit per dollar, and Hanson, with a 10% positive roi in 26 races. Marcus Hersh came out with a negative line, even though I had featured him in a previous C&X because of his two informed-minority wins at the Claiming Crown. Malecki had the worst record, with a single win in 45 IM races, getting back only 18 cents out of each dollar spent.
From the recent BC results, I suspect that my original hypothesis of filtering out the less likely handicappers may not be the right idea. Thanks to Don's research, I can conclude that maintaining the handicapping diversity is better than filtering it out.

INSIDE THE INFORMED MINORITY:
THE LOGIC OF A LONGSHOT WINNER
[Editor's note. From my journalistic background, I'm an information digger. Thus I asked Steve Klein, one of the two informed-minority success stories of BC 2006, the reason for his picking Thor's Echo in The Sprint. Here's what Steve has to say.mc]
from Steve Klein
Mark, you asked me how I picked Thor's Echo to win the Breeders' Cup Sprint, a selection that qualified as one of your profitable "Informed Minority" bets. Here is the thought process I used:
I thought that Bordonaro was the horse to beat in the race. But I was intrigued by the fact that Thor's Echo had just finished a close second to him in the Ancient Title, especially since Thor's Echo was going to be a much higher price than Bordonaro in the BC Sprint. I watched a replay of the Ancient Title. What I saw helped me to make the winning pick, along with the use of Klein Speed Points.
Although it does not show in the running line, I saw that Bordonaro had actually opened up an early two length lead over Thor's Echo prior to the first quarter-mile call. Thor's Echo then made a run at Bordonaro, and challenged him on the turn. Bordonaro pulled clear, but Thor's Echo made a second move, and was gaining on Bordonaro during the late stages. He lost by only a length.
I learned from writing my book, "The Power of Early Speed," that horses who enjoy a clear early lead have a significant advantage in their races. I studied 1,671,627 horses to learn everything I could about the impact of early speed, and to improve my ability to anticipate pace scenarios. The chart on page 28 of my book shows that there were 79, 273 horses in that huge sample who enjoyed a lead of two to three lengths during the early going. They won 34.5 percent of those races, with a generous $3.85 ROI. That meant that Bordonaro had enjoyed a very good trip while clear early vs. just five opponents in the Ancient Title. He figured to have a much tougher time vs. 13 rivals in the BC Sprint.
I use Klein Speed Points in my handicapping (they are explained in chapter four), not only to find horses who are likely to be the early speed, but also to help me to interpret pace scenarios, as mentioned in chapter five of the book.
I am a perfectionist in some ways, and since I wrote the book I have been working diligently on improvements to that formula. Based on these new, improved ratings I could see that Bordonaro was likely to be pressed enough early in the BC Sprint to soften him up for Thor's Echo, who could rate just behind him. If Thor's Echo and Bordonaro both ran the same races they did in the Ancient Title, my reading of the pace scenario, through the Klein Speed Points, indicated that Thor's Echo had a legitimate chance to win.
[Steve's new updated version of Klein Speed Points calculated for every horse running on each day's race card at selected major tracks will be available on my web site, powerofearlyspeed.com, in mid-January. We'll do an extended interview of Klein during that period. For a number of years now, he's been the DRF handicapper for the Kentucky circuit.]

THE JERRY AND MORTY SHOW:
THE ART OF DVD
Review of Jerry Bailey's Inside Track: Your Inside Advantage to Horse Racing and Handicapping, hosted and produced by Morty Mittenthal.
Like the break on a pool table, the start and early positioning of a horse race seems unpredictable. We've just seen several contentious Breeders' Cup races won by the best strategic rider. The way a race is to be run is not something that conventional handicapping can easily decipher. The chaos factor seems alive and well. That's why sprint races that are full of early speed may sometimes be won by the speed of the speed rather than the come-from-behinder.
"I like to take everybody else out of the race be pressing a relatively moderate pace," notes Jerry Bailey in one of the many truly informative interviews on this two-volume set of DVDs.
The synergy of riders can make a huge difference in the outcome of a race. Riders who know each other so well might ask, just before a race:
"Angel [Cordero] are you going?" another rider on a early speed horse has asked Cordero.
The answer to this question might determine the complexion of the race. For example, how is it that Beyer did not pick War Emblem to win the Kentucky Derby, when this colt had by far the highest Beyer figure? Few of us, including Beyer, could have known that War Emblem would be left alone. So how did it happen?
Jerry Bailey tells us. Regarding Victor Espinoza, Bailey notes that because he did not have the stakes reputation, the rest of the riders left him alone.
On the Jerry Bailey’s Inside Track DVDs, Bailey teaches us much that we should know, but he also shows us when we should realize that we need to know more, as in the case of the synchronicity of diverse rider styles determining the running of a race.
The dynamics of rider styles is only a small part of this big package. Bailey also goes deeply into trainer specialties, and from a Hall-of-Fame rider’s perspective, this can be illuminating. I suspect that one reason I decided that all of Pletcher's BC favorites would be overvalued was the fact that Bailey outlines when Pletcher is most successful cranking his horses up for a peak performance, and that season is not October or November.
The quality of insider information on these DVDs is not only Jerry Bailey himself, but also the fact that Morty Mittenthal asks all the right questions.
The production is also visually stunning. The dark background and clever photography help us see into the eyes of Mr. Bailey, bringing out his warm personality and honed intellect. Whoever invented the pinhead label for jockeys should look reconsider. Bailey is one of a long line of communicative and deep-thinking riders, that for me has included includes Chris McCarron, Christophe Soumillon, Cash Asmussen, Julie Krone, and so many others.
The visual quality of this set of two DVDs is especially pertinent to the chapters on body language. I find myself reviewing these chapters again and again. For the first time, I’m not so blind about watching horses.
Back in the intimate surroundings of the recording studio, Bailey has felt comfortable dealing with controversy, as well, notably in his eloquently expressed opinions on "Drugs in the Game".
Bailey's trainer profiles capture the essence of certain trainers in a way that sometimes can help with our handicapping and other times will enhance our enjoyment of the game. I loved the line where Bailey showed his admiration for Jerkens as being "out to prove that jockeys don't matter; he uses 'em all." We're not restricted to the designer trainers either. Bailey provides insight for lay-low trainers with high average mutuels like Linda Rice and Thomas Bush.
All in all there are 12 chapters in the two volumes.
You can find out details on this product by seeing www.winwithjerry.com
If you believe that handicapping is half art and half science, then you can bolster the artistic aspect of your handicapping by listening closely to Jerry Bailey. I'm proud that this product comes from a man who has long been part of the C&X community.
Being in France, my DVD player only handles Zone 2, Europe DVDs. (I use this as a tool for my French university students.) But I had an American Zone 1 DVD reader installed exclusively to see Morty's product. I recommend viewing again and again so the nuances sinks in.
PS. I tested the Jerry Bailey DVD with a race track manager at the French racing association. He remembered that Bailey had ridden Six Perfections. He's a horseman as well. We used his laptop, knowing there was no other way to show an American DVD in Europe, and even when the laptop does show the DVD, there's less quality of sound and image. Nevertheless, the content and artistic finish of the Jerry-and-Morty product still came through.
I work as a language consultant, and this horseman needs to know English in a way that he can communicate with international racing personalities.Suddenly I realized that I had taken something for granted about the Bailey-Mittenthal project. The language that I took so naturally when I viewed the DVD myself had become a special asset. Through my client's eyes, I realized that the whole lexicon of racing was rolling forth in a fashion that a horseplayer like me might describe as "poetry". There were even moments when language became essential ingredient, like when Morty asked Jerry his opinion about "hanging dogs". Morty had invented the term, and then had forgotten it was his invention.
"I've heard of horses that hang," Jerry responded with glee, "and I've ridden dogs," but I never heard of a hanging dog."

THE BIG HORSE:
LIVE RACING COMES BACK ON THE WRITTEN PAGE
C&X should have gotten around to reviewing The Big Horse by novelist and journalist Joe McGinniss (Simon & Schuster, 2004) a long time ago. As live racing wanes, many great racing stories remain untapped and might be forgotten forever. McGinness has chosen to profile one of racing's unforgettable personalities, PG Johnson, who at nearly 80 years old, delivered the second biggest longshot winner ever in the Breeders' Cup Classic, Volponi.
The plot of the story is the life of PG Johnson, with occasional flashbacks that switch to Johnson in the first person, while the rest of the book is first person McGiniss. Thus we have two narrators, both stylish in their own unique ways.
The main plot is Johnson himself, a Chicago boy whose mother died in childbirth, and who preferred the mean streets to the school room. He falls in love with racing, finds himself some riding lessons, and decides at a young age that he wants to be a trainer before he knows anything about racing. That became his only goal. Still under age, he raced horses under borrowed name, and down the road got his training license. He struggles with the claiming game, manages to get some stakes winners, and eventually becomes a Hall-of-Fame trainer, though never considered among the elite.
He does this all the while that he makes enemies thanks to his blunt honesty. There's a stubborn streak in Johnson that is elegantly portrayed by McGinnis. The reader can't wait for the next needless conflict, triggered by Johnson's bluntness. As uncomfortable as he may have been, his straight-ahead frankness is also portrayed as a positive attribute.
Eventually he decided that he couldn’t depend on his owners for getting him the big horse, so he began breeding on his own.
"I never knew how to kiss rich peoples' asses, and I got too old to learn," Johnson explains. "If no owner was going to give me a big horse, I figured I'd have to find one myself."
He looks for stallions with good pedigree that were unimpressive in their first two crops: "...he could get him cheaper after two bad years, which could have been the result of energy depleted at the track. Renewed energy plus low stud fee equals success."
As for mares, he chose well-bred mares with little or no racing ability, also because of the favorable economics.
Johnson represented the smaller-scale, hands-on operation that makes racing much more profound than the sport of kings. If Johnson is the main character, there are others who shine in their own way, mainly because they either got along with Johnson (Barclay Tagg) or were his arch rival (Robert Frankel).
All the while that Johnson's big horse Volponi is attempting to prepare for a second Breeders' Cup Classic, he is crossing paths with Tagg's Funny Cide and Frankel's Medaglia d'Oro. Johnson takes potshots at Frankel the way a local punk challenges the tough guy on the block.
McGinnis himself is an important secondary character. Once in love with racing, he got lost along the way only to rediscover his lost love as he followed Johnson and other trainers and absorbed the atmosphere of Saratoga.
There is little of the Seabiscuit-type melodrama in The Big Horse. Here we have an authentic story of one of racing's oddest and most driven personalities, and as we turn pages, we can't wait to see how Mr. Johnson gets out of the next predicament. Some of his predicaments are self-inflicted, but most concern the struggles of a non-conformist against the racing establishment.
Along the way we enjoy the spectacle but we cannot avoid the reality that so much of this spectacle involves patient waiting for a big moment in the far-off furtue that may or may not materialize. If it does, it is over in less than two minutes, and usually with not the results we have waited for. And then we start all over again.
The patience factor cannot be underestimated. For me, and hopefully for C&X readers as well, there are lessons that filter into our reading. We learn how subjective horse owners can be, which should forever turn us away from so-called insider action, and should have us doubting about the rationale for horses being entered in a big race.
I even found insights that have helped me understand my own handicapping methodology. I have always wondered, for example, why the maiden comeback method continues to work. In this method, a young horse is layed off following only one or two initial races at the maiden special weight level. The method calls for betting this horse when he returns to racing, so long as he's again entered at the maiden special weight level and that he has a trainer with at least a 12 percent hit rate.
"I'm probably too goddamned patient," Johnson says. He later adds, "There's nothing wrong with running a two-year-old, even early. But putting the pressure on them and breaking them from the gate as hard and fast as they can, that's a different story."
This is precisely the pattern that the maiden comeback method seeks. Horses have been raced only once or twice in their career, but have not necessarily finished in the money. That was their schooling. Then they are rested. (Johnson himself was a successful layoff trainer.) The 12 percent or above requirement has trainer patience embedded in it. The layoff is useful. The horse grows. And the comeback race is well-intended if the horse continues at the maiden special weight level. The players will judge the horse by its previous Beyer rating during the patient days, when in fact, the horse will have filled out into a faster runner.
If you're only concerned with plot of The Big Horse, then you will be aware of part of the ending, since we all know that Volponi did not fire in his bid to repeat in the BC Classic.
Johnson is the sometimes hero, sometimes anti-hero of this brilliant page-turner. Saratoga is the hidden star. McGinnis backs up what C&X has often noted. Saratoga is the only American race track where being there still eclipses all forms of off-track and on-line wagering. Saratoga is the only place where racing consumes a whole region, where my Aunt Ada watches the stretch drive of the feature on the prime-time news, where the Albany Times-Union (mentioned by McGinnis) dedicates a comprehensive spread to racing coverage and includes the big race on the front page.
"Saratoga Springs," writes McGinnis, "is a peaceful old town of twenty-five thousand in upstate New York that for six weeks in summer becomes the one place in America – with the exception of Louisville during Derby week – where horse racing shows it can still be an obsession."
Throughout this stylish narration, we are reminded of racing reality. The romanticism of Seabiscuit is replaced by the dramatic but frightful reality that is accepted grudgingly by all of us who stay with this game. PG Johnson often waxes philosophical.
After Volponi finishes second for the fifth straight time after getting bumped much too hard for it to have occurred by mere chance, Johnson recognizes that there is absolutely nothing he can do about it.
"It's part of the game. Horse racing may look pretty from a distance, but up close we're gouging each others' eyes out," Johnson says. "That's the game. That's racing. It's the kinda thing that happens every day. As long as the horse is all right, I'll be fine."
The Big Horse is a good old-fashioned page turner and could have only been written by a fiction author who knows how to craft characters and by an investigative reporter who can ferret out the truth. Joe McGinnis is two authors in one, and this book is a big winning exacta of literature.

C&X CAFE
From Don:
I thought I would share this "eccentric" bet with you. It was reported in the Louisville Courier Journal on 29 Sept. that a horse named "Chickaloo was listed at 200-1 for the Epsom Handicap. Chickapoo has been dead since Sept. 9, having been euthanized after breaking a leg. Tom Hunt of Adelaide bet 5 Australian dollars on it and said: "I knew the horse was put down, and I thought it was strange to see it in the market, so I went to the TAB to see if they'd take my money." Paul Caica, minister of South Australia's gamblingwatchdog said his office investigate the matter, and any punter who backed this horse after its death will receive a refund from the TAB.
Don

i read the on line issue where you talked about long shot scenarios. This past Thursday,7Sep AP 8th race was a turfer at 1 1/16. The #11 horse was a third time starter that day. His debut was at 5.5F and he ran 6th of 9 horses and never really in the running. His odds were 32-1. He returns 5 months later at 5F on the turf and he won at 5-1. This day he was stretched out to 1 1/16 and according to Helm stats he is a SI of 3 meaning the distance was favorable. I chose to tell you about this because in your book "value handicapping" you mentioned early speed and route pedigree was a lethal combination. So it was this day as he won by 3 and paid $15.60. Combining that info with the odds bet down from a bad dirt race to turf was clear trainer intent for turf. Of course this is after the fact but something i try to find. The bottom line is: whenever a lightly raced horse has an odds drop when doing something new after a series of off races then it becomes clear what the trainer's intent is – irregardless if he wins that day or not. By the way , the AP winner had a 21% trainer win record and recorded 2 trainer stats in the 4+30 range. (sprint to route 4 + 30 2.96) and (won last race 4 + 25 2.48) don
ps your "value handicapping" book has a lot of information other then how to construct a line and is always out and open around here. If I could remember what i read in it every time i handicap i might have a chance to get better.
mc responds:
Hey Don,
I should also check my old writing more often. In your Arlington race, the second win at 5-1 looks like it might have been a "maiden return". Were the horse's first and second starts both Md Sp Wt?

from Todd
One of my track buddies down in Louisville has been keeping stats of running styles that finish 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th. He
only plays Tri's and Super's and I've sorta followed him down that road, believing thats really the only place to make any real money these days. We figure its easier to beat one race than 3 or 4 with the pick 3's and 4's. Anyway, back to his stat keeping, he uses those combined with his normal handicapping and for the last two years has hit for $15,000 to $20,000 each year for some extra income. Just wondered if you've ever studied that aspect, running styles that finish in certain positions?
mc responds:
There are two subjects here, both which are worth discussion, and I hope C&X readers will chime in. My own past performances tell me that single-race exotics are less likely to be wrecked by the chaos factor than serial exotics, and that it's easier to understand one race deeply than to synchronize three or four races. But that may be my own personal pps and not represent everyone. As for running styles and their finish positions, the Sartin group (Howard Sartin) did much research on such, and they were true believers in making "track profiles". Early on in a meet, they kept records of the finish positions of different running styles, and then printed out a graphic representation of the track profile. I believe it was Sartin who made the differentiation between need-to-lead horses and more sustainable early speed.
Brohamer's book, Modern Pace Handicapping, was very much derived from such analysis, though Tom was his own man in most respects. The Sartin people paid homage to Huey Mahl, the original pace handicapping intellectual. In later years of his handicapping life, the great Tom Ainslie (aka Dick Carter) was attracted by the Sartin methodology and I watched him use it successfully. In summary, a good slice of handicapping history would back Todd's friend in his focus on running styles for exotics.

THE BUTTERFLY EFFECT
This comes from a horse racing blogger. Did Scared Money have anything to do with his hitting the Pick 4? Here's what he noted.mc
Sunday, October 01, 2006
If a blogger falls in the woods and no one else is around, does he still make a sound when he hits the pick four?
Sure as hell does, baby. After spending yesterday morning reading Mark Cramer's excellent book Scared Money (a copy of which can be purchased at the Daily Racing Form), I reviewed the past performances for the NTRA National Pick 4, then logged into my Youbet account to place a little wager. I ended up playing Ashkal Way(Ire), Meteor Storm(GB) and Friendly Island in the Kelso Breeders' Cup Handicap (G2); Ball Four and Perfect Drift in the Kentucky Cup Classic (G2); Wait A While in the Yellow Ribbon Stakes (G1); and good ole The Tin Man in the Clement L. Hirsch Memorial Turf Championship (G1). The ticket only cost $6, so I repeated the bet four times, a small $24 investment that rewarded me to the tune of $520. Whoo hoo! Over the next couple of weeks, my plan is to try and fatten my bankroll - in part by playing the two remaining National Pick 4 wagers - in the hopes of justifying the purchase of a plane ticket to Louisville for the Breeders' Cup. I say justify only because I recently lost my day job, so I'm trying to balance the part of me that wants to be practical and frugal with the part of me that's screaming, "Just buy the plane ticket already, damnit!" If practicality and frugality win out, I'm giving serious thought to live-blogging the races from home as the action unfolds on ESPN. But no matter what happens between now and November 4, it'll be a lot of fun trying to get there.
posted by Paddock Pete @ 9:35 AM

ALSO-ELIGIBLE VACATIONS
WHERE RACING IS NOT A MARGINAL SUBCULTURE
by Kevin Liang
Also-Eligible Vacations is a sometimes column presenting vacations spots where horseplayers can still find action. The typical problem we have when travelling with a family is that the wife and kids want a place where there's no racing. Also-Eligible Vacations suggests places with plenty of attractions for the non-horseplayers in the family, but with the necessary racing action available for the horseplayer.mc
Imagine a place where mutual tickets litter the ground, horseplayers gather under TV monitors, and betting windows get crowded 3 minutes to post. Sound familiar? Woodbine? Hollywood Park? Churchill Downs? Upon closer inspection, you notice o-cha (green tea) dispensers throughout the building, concession stands selling neatly packed bento boxes alongside hot dogs and Sapporo beer, and automated payout machines. Welcome to horseracing in Japan.
While on vacation this fall, I figured it would be great to experience the racing culture that Japan has to offer. Horseracing is well established in the Japanese landscape, having roots that go back to 1862 when the first Western-style horse races were held in Yokohama. Modern day racing in Japan is organized at 2 levels: the Japan Racing Association (JRA) and local government. The top horses in the country will compete at the JRA level, while horses of lesser quality run at the local government level. The JRA operates several racetracks throughout Japan, including Kyoto, Tokyo, and Nakayama racecourse. During my trip, I was able to visit Nakayama and Kyoto racecourse.
Public transportation to and from a racecourse in Japan is very accessible, with Kyoto racecourse being a 5 minute walk from the train station. For those who cycle around town, Kyoto racecourse has a large sheltered area for bicycles (as it happens, cycling is a sport that can also be wagered on in Japan). Contrast this with North America, where some racetracks are surrounded by massive paved lots, with the car as the only viable transport option.
I found an interesting cross-section of horseplayers in Japan. As in North America, you have a core group of middle-aged men, but I was surprised at the number of younger horseplayers who attend the track. Young men and women, sometimes accompanied by small children, were happily reading the Japanese equivalent of the Form and cheering on their selections. One possibility for this turnout is the amount of positive media given to racing in Japan. Yutaka Take, the leading jockey in Japan, can often be seen on TV, addressing fans and talk show hosts in a pleasant manner. Going back several years, a huge fan base also developed over Haru Urara, a horse winless in 113 races (since retired). At the height of her popularity, bettors were purchasing tickets as talismans against bad luck. In addition, my flight to and from Japan featured a documentary and movie focused around horse racing!
Getting back to the track, vendors at Kyoto racecourse were stocked with several racing forms, each advertising the latest mega payout from recent selections. In addition, several glossy magazines were available on a monthly basis, often coming with a DVD of past races. In Japan, there is definitely no shortage of reading material for horseplayers. Back in Vancouver, it's usually a scavenger hunt to find the Form, and I often get puzzled looks when I inquire about it. Facing the stretch and finish line, I was not greeted with an aging tote board like at Hastings Park, the local track I grew up with. Instead, Kyoto racecourse opted for two massive video displays. To locate a tote board, one has to head towards the paddock area. Here, one can marvel at a multi-story tote board, with information on current and past races, including payouts for all exacta and quinella combinations. Something interesting is the fact that win odds are calculated to one decimal place. In Japan, punters can place bets on straight wagers and intra-race exotics. From what I understand, multi-race exotics are not available. Despite the great technology, I found the location of the tote board a bit too far from the action of the track.
Inside the grandstand, the first thing I noticed was the number of people sitting on lawn chairs, picnic blankets, and plain old newspaper (one has to admire the Japanese penchant for cleanliness!). Since seating is limited, many people will improvise and set up shop in corners and along walls. The next thing I noticed was rows of betting machines. All betting is automated, and there are specific machines for wagering and payouts. To place a wager, I had to fill out a sheet, similar to a lottery form. The minimum wager in Japan is 100 Yen. Payout is lightning fast, with the machine spitting out notes and exact change. Above the betting machines, rows of TVs were mounted, displaying odds or live feeds from other JRA tracks. Strangely, I was told bettors are not allowed to wager on races outside of Japan. Despite the time difference, there is probably a big untapped pool of bettors here.
As the day progressed at Kyoto, I found myself adapting to the new environs. The feature race that day (Oct 8th) was the Kyoto Daishoten, a 2400m Grade 2 route on the turf. From reports I read on japanracing.jp, I settled on a horse by the name of Stratagem. He had shown potential in past races, but was lacking a victory in recent times. Maybe today would be the day. He went off at odds of 10.1. As the race progressed, he remained in mid pack until the final turn. Stratagem flashed some brilliance here, but was overtaken by a few other horses with about 150m to go. He placed 5th, with a horse named Sweep Tosho winning the race. I stayed around for the last race while the crowd dispersed, and picked up a nice Sunday Silence postcard at the gift shop.
If you have a chance to visit Japan, try to make it out to a racecourse. You will be in for a treat. Where else can you enjoy a bowl of ramen and place a win bet on an overlooked horse?
For more information: japanracing.jp – the English website of the JRA
stosarabu.blogspot.com – a journal of one race fan in Japan
Kevin lives in Vancouver, BC. Outside of his day job, he runs Vancouver Bike Products, a small mail-order shop for unique bicycle parts and accessories ( http://vanbike.ca).

POSTSCRIPT:
LIVE RACING
The articles in this issue on racing in Japan and The Big Horse conjure up tattered images of live racing.
I remember sitting up high in the M section of the Santa Anita grandstand. It was the best place to view the race, midstretch so that you could see ‘em coming around the turn and could visualize which horses would have the most gas for the stretch drive.
The rich, dark texture of the racing strip could have been labelled The Good Earth.
At any moment, you could walk through the tunnel under the stretch and picnic in the infield. I used to enjoy walking all the way to the backstretch side of the infield and watching sprinters burst out of the gate. I also enjoyed walking out of the track up to the starting gate of the downhill turf course, and watching pastel silks and shiny coats explode into a work of abstract expressionism.
Then there was Clockers’ Corner, where you could have a good old greasy spoon breakfast, watch the workouts, and say hello to trainers and riders. Had a great chat with Joy Scott one morning and wrote up the interview. All this with the haze lifting in the distance and baring the San Gabriel Mountains.
Am I being anachronistic in hoping that this tradition can somehow be resuscitated. The last time I visited Santa Anita, the M section and beyond in the grandstand was roped off. Not enough people. Charles Bukowski’s hangout in the upper tier above Clockers Corner was empty.
There are still some tracks where I can hang on to the old feel of live racing. Canterbury Park is one of them, and of course, Saratoga. At one time or another I enjoyed live racing at Gulfstream, Tampa Bay, Laurel, Pimlico, Charles Town, Penn National, the Meadowlands, Belmont, Aqueduct, Saratoga, Finger Lakes, Arlington, Hawthorne, the old Sportsmans Park, Fairmount, Hollywood Park, Santa Anita, Los Alamitos, Fairplex, Caliente, Albuquerque, and so many other tracks, some elegant, others dumpy but trendy, others just plain dumpy, and others where you could take in the urban landscape or smell the nearby cows in the fields.
Tell me the truth. Do you get the same thrill booting up your computer to watch the races as you would walking through the tunnel that opened up by the rail, and looking at the toteboard shine with the morning line odds of the first race of the day? Is it possible that beautiful Hialeah is defunct? Will polytracks forever change the landscape of the game? People know that the Big Screen is better than the TV and people still read books even when they can get them on the internet. Can Kentucky save the tradition? Or maybe Texas? Tell us about live racing in your part of the woods.