| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
johnnyv
Canada
311 Posts |
 Posted - 05/30/2008 : 05:49:21
|
I was searching on my old computer and found this gem that Boxie sent me about nine or ten years ago. I had forwarded it to BillC and he thought it would be a good idea to post it to BHM.
Here it is:
N.A.P. is an acronymn you should commit to memory. Perhaps when you're
involved in the heat of handicapping, N.A.P. will still come to mind --
although I wouldn't recommend you taking one during such times <g>.. What
does it stand for? Numbers, Angles and Price. Let's briefly review each
of these.
Numbers: We use speed and pace numbers as measuring rods to help us
determine horses' basic class levels and their form. Decent speed and
pace figs are still the best barometers for this purpose because they are
the most reliable, generally speaking.
Angles: Racing angles also helps us to get a line on horses class, form
and trainer's intentions. We can think of numbers as being the bones, and
Angles as being the meat on the bones. Many times, though, there is
"tension" between Angles and Numbers -- especially when it comes to the
Form Factor. The Angles will tell us one thing, while the Numbers will
tell us something else -- which was precisely the case with Solar Appeal.
The Performance Angles said it was a "go" for the horse, but the Numbers
said the horse wasn't nearly as sharp as a couple of other entrants.
Price: Technically, Price isn't a handicapping factor -- it's an
investment factor. However, Taulbot would disagree with me on this. He
felt so strongly about getting good prices on selections that his rating
system actually incorporated contenders' near post time odds into it! And
in a real sense, I can't blame him for adopting this procedure. Good
Prices cover a multitude of losing selections. The nature of handicapping
being what it is will many times lead us to 2 or sometimes even 3 viable
contenders in a race who are virtually impossible to separate. When this
happens we shouldn't try to separate them either, for invariably when we
do we'll find ourselves splitting hairs -- a practice we want to avoid
like the plague. But this is where the Price Factor becomes so valuable ,
for Price is a GREAT arbitrater of these kinds of "disputes".
As far as I'm concerned, a race offers up a logical selection in it when
ONE horse enjoys a N.A.P, that is to say, has decent form and/or basic
class numbers, good angles (translate: strong VP) and a decent price.
This is _the ideal_ wagering situation.
A race offers up a "decent percentage-type play" whenever a horse does not
enjoy a N.A.P -- i.e. he's missing an element, which more often than not
usually means that he has come up short in the Numbers department --
being
deficient in basic class and/or form numbers. However, his Angles are
strong and he's about to go off at a nice Price. So, why not take a shot
in this type of race situation?
Or a race offers decent percentage plays whenever there is more than one
"logical selection" in the race -- which was the case with that 9th race
at Hialeah. I really felt that either of my final two contenders would be
able to pull it off. Both were sharp (had the Numbers), both had good
Angles, and both were going off at decent Prices. IOW, both were N.A.P.s
One final thing before taking my leave -- We know that there is such a
thing as longshot angles. We know that betting trainers do indeed have
their many little devices that they employ to aid them in getting good
prices. And we know the betting public is prone to overlook certain types
of horses in certain types of situations. In either secenario, we're
looking at a longshot situation, and you must learn to recognize these
types of situations and take advantage of them whenever the horse is going
off at a nice price.
HH in the 9th fit the latter scenario. He wasn't manevuered to get a
price, nor was his form hidden -- heck, he won his LR and was sharp. But
there were two reasons why the crowd sent him off at 26-1: a) first time
starter on the grass with probably nothing in his pedigree to suggest he'd
take to the weeds; and b) the crowd didn't think he'd be able to repeat
his win because the public is generally ignorant on how to properly assess
workouts. The public had no idea that he was still sharp as at tack and
ready to run another big race. this is why I consider workout angles to
be longshot angles, generally speaking.
Sorry for the length of this, but I hope this bird-eye view of what a
playable race consists of will be of help to you.
Take care,
|
|
|
boxcar
USA
1825 Posts |
Posted - 05/30/2008 : 20:44:58
|
Man...does that bring back memories!
You're making me feel old, John. LOL!
Boxcar |
 |
|
|
johnnyv
Canada
311 Posts |
Posted - 05/31/2008 : 07:22:49
|
| Never old, just more experienced. LOL |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
NAP
