MMQ: Monday Morning Quarterbacking
and The 2009 Sax Breeders Cup
"Rats scatter at the sound of human foot steps but not
raptors. T.H.E.Y tap their toenail in anticipation of a
good meal.", he said thinking of last Sunday's George
Stephanopoulos TV show where the details escaped
him for the moment but not the observable point: the
Sam Donaldson almost, but not quite, but
almost devoured the
conservative George Will.
Again ... am I just noticing this for the first time or
are T.H.E.Y more like Steven Spielberg's Raptors in
the "Jurassic Park" movie and not like cornered rats
as depicted by Ayn Rand somewhere in her writings.
(That is, am I underestimating my political
Probably a little of both--I'm just noticing and T.H.E.Y - having been out of power
for sometime - are on the prowl like a pack of starving
But halt. (Since my mother always told me not be
so thinned skin I have built up a tough hide over the
years and no longer fear being eaten by Democrats.)
Since I had introduced a "devour" theme in my
Breeders Cup release last week I just couldn't resist
starting this MMQ the way I did but now on with the
That is I could just as easily have started this way:
BC results, DISASTER!
Or: The rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
Or: Thank god for small favors.
If I were a spinner of tales and other fictions which
seems to be the thing to be these days I would look
back and cherry pick the best results and then put
these up front as my successes.
Just for the fun of it lets try this approach while
noticing very quickly that I said I was going to bet my
top pick over and under for $1 exacta and had I done
that I would have bet 266 dollars over the two days of
the 14 Breeder Cup races and only cashed in three
tickets worth a total of $87 for a loss of 179 bucks.
But that's the boring outcome.
Let's try the funner approach (again, while
recognizing it is not the intellectually honest
just the what the-potential-purchasers-of-my-
computer-program want to hear approach - and
I don't necessarily mean this derisively, just factually.).
So here it is.
MMQ Breeders Cup - Deering opts to
heed the advice of other more seasoned
handicappers who suggest that for BC races you
maybe should go deeper and so he bets his $2 six
deep trifecta boxes (rather than his usual $1 three
deep and an occassional 5 deep but never ever six
deep until now) and walks away with a cool $2,246
profit. That is, a cool 66.8% return on investment in a
Now isn't that a funner headline?
Rather than the real one:
MMQ Breeders Cup - thank god for small
favors. That is, the most money I could scare up to bet
was sixty bucks and I lost that so fast it made me feel
dizzy. (See Fridays races 6, 7 and 8 which are the
ones after home from work that I could bet hence
chose to bet.)
So back to the drawing board.
Or that is, it looks like my first impulse was right
again - don't do the top pick over/under AT SANTA
ANITA race track as it wins less than 40% of the time,
the top 5 in an exacta or the top 6 in a trifecta.
My Sax Greeks
said don't do over and under as it wins less than 40%
of the time (alpha 1 plus beta 1 = .36 for all 644 races
in the Sax database which is a not very good number
compared to say, Retama which does almost 50% for
its 368 races in the database) and also don't bet any
turf races because the performance on these is
pathetic at Santa Anita whereas on dirt races there it is
ok if you box at least 5 deep for exactas and six deep
for the trifectas. (Actually since this turf race info
was "insider" knowledge that I didn't share in my
simply because I didn't have time to cover
absolutely everything I can't use it here.)
On day-to-day betting the 5 deep exacta is a looser
bet but with the Breeders Cup maybe the
payouts will be high enough to justify the risk.
Same too for the six deep trifecta boxes.
Lets test this on paper taking the races 3 thru 8
from Friday and 2 thru 9 from Saturday and write the w
(in) p(lace) s(how) position on each one.
[ click here for pdf file
showing this ]
and when we look at the results and discover the
six deep tri box won Fridays 6th and 8th race - paying
$95 and $523 respectively for the $1 bet and double
for the $2 - and Saturday's 4th and 8th - paying
$2,145 and $40 respectively for the $1 and double that
for the $2 - we generate a new headline:
BC MMQ and how to turn a $60 loss into
a $179 loss and then into a $2,246 gain.
ans: by spin doctoring it ...
Fact is I personally lost so all the foregoing didn't
do me any good and since I don't really have time to
pursue this further I am ending it - Breeders Cup
If I save a hundred dollars a month for the next 12
months then next year I can bet the six deep trifecta's
at the Breeders Cup and see what happens.
Since it looks like interest rates and taxation rates
in this country are heading for outer space the
chances of me saving a hundred bucks a month
towards my next year betting pool is a big fat zilch.
What if they (next years BC races) are - as they
almost surely will be - run at a different track? Should
it be track or horses that matter most in my
Have to figure it out later.
aka gAry deEring
the worlds most consistent handicapper and
erratic bettor ...
Just recently I heard my other computer betting
program approach (what I call, M4)
as "dutching" and I didn't know what this was. I had
heard of this kind of betting referred to as "due" betting
but not "dutching" your bets. So for those of you who
like dutch or due betting you should check out my
computer program. Why? Because it is a computer
program that has done two things: 1)
turned "dutching" your win bets into an exact science
and 2) testing your personal ability to handle bi-polar
or near bi-polar behavioral ranges into a ... a ...
what? ... a psychhological test of your psychhology that
is both enlightening and fun. That is,
can learn first hand and in a fairly non-
threatening way the absolute importance
of "testing" in your own psychhological growth and
[ Here for more
M4 information ... click on the Go to the
Horse Races ... bubble when you get
there ... ]
Remember very first comments on
where we highly
suspected that the "sure thing" probably would not
work out as in the gambling aspects of betting or any
gambling the only thing you can count on - in a fair
game - is that "sure things" never work.
We were right as Friday's race x and Saturday's
race n sure thing bet was to have the winner in the top
3 picks and in the former it was x deep and the latter, y
So that if random means you can't predict
anything about it, how is horse race outcome
random - you can predict that sure things almost
always loose, the favorite tends to win a third of the
races, the Greeks will out (or so it seems), and
winning streaks are extremely common.
And oh also, the most likely outcome in
betting on horses is, to loose. (That is, if you use my
LC1p53.exe Logical Choice predictions/White Sheet
as your source and bet fewer than three horses
to win in any given race AND are trying to bet so that
you end up with a +roi.)
With all these "predictable" things how can we
conclude that horse race outcomes are "random"?
Fact is we can't, they aren't and this is one reason
why betting on the horses is or can be a heck of a lot
more fun than going to the casino.
At least sometimes.
Not that that is your only choice of course, said he
di-polar man to his significant ar.
oops oops or that is a double oops or
is, oh shit!
I didn't bet the "sure thing" races because they
were turf races and I thought it was the surface type
not the age that mattered and just now when I look at
the two 2 year old only races (Friday's 4th and
Saturday's 2nd ) I won both of them for a net profit of
16 bucks (over 250% return!!!).
So now I ask me (after a quick check of my Sax
database) is the expensive ($$$) 2 year old only races
that win "over/under all" exactas 61% of the time a
worthwhile thing to check out this winter? Well I think
since Santa Anita season usually runs from the day
after Christmas and into the spring that some cold
wintry night here in Minnesota when the f'g wind is
howling around my house I'll build a fire and cozy in
with my big screen TV and online computer betting
and check this out ...
If, that is, those interest rates don't hit double digit
before then and "they" foreclose on my cozy spot here
as my interest only mortgage resets in the new year
and/or IF the government taxes don't soar to
what they were back in the middle'ish part of the last
century ( 90% on upper end rich people I seem to
recall which of course I don't
have to worry about ... but ...)
to be continued,
build better humans)
Copyright © 2009 RaIse Books, LLC. All rights
reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part is
prohibited. RaIse Books, LLC is a for profit
organization. Contributions to RaIse Books, LLC are
not tax-exempt. gdeering.com,
theREALinconvenientTRUTH.com and certain other
dot coms are owned by Gary Deering. All material on
Gary's dot com websites and websides, including
RaIseBooks.com is copyrighted. Reproduction in
whole or part is prohibited without express
permission. If you are interested in publishing any of
Gary's material, please contact him at
firstname.lastname@example.org with the details to request
permission. Thank you.