Oaklawn Race 5 - Friday 2/9

[Jeebs]

Basically the same contenders as the Original/FTL guidelines except now #'s 9 and #10 are at play. BLT/C paints a more complex picture of the race, as #10 shows ability to run fast in F1 and not burn itself out so much. The non-contending #7 still figures into the pace scenario, which means that #5 and #8 will need their running shoes on in the F1. However, #8 owns a superior TT over #6, who still runs strong (Top SC). #10 owns F3, which with a combo of a strong F1 and F3, would likely be enough to overcome the potential early burnout. #1's F3 move appears too little too late.

Match-Up Graph:

[Jeebs]

In this race, BLT/C yields more possible "true" contenders than the Original/FTL guidelines did. However, more can sometimes muddy the waters a touch. Although #10 looks dominant off that last line, the reality is that the horse typically doesn't show up in the initial race off the layoff. In layoffs of 50+ days in its 10 race chart, the horse shows nothing. We won't know until after the race is run whether this one will be able to run a big one off the bench. I would downgrade this one based on its previous layoff history. I would also downgrade the #1 based on its Total Energy and nasty habit of doing its serious bidding in F3. Lastly, if you downgrade #9 due to an ice cold trainer at the meet, you're left with the trio of 5-6-8.

The BLT/C matchup flatters #8 more than the other matchup did, although #6 still looms a major threat. In fact, both Sartin elements flatter #6.

Overall, I don't see this as a prime opportunity. For the most part, both paceline/contender guideline sets point to the same runners, albeit a few extra runners and differences in pacelines. There are some unknowns that exist that are tough calls. However, for entertainment/small profit, you can't do wrong playing the #6, as it passes the acid test on both the Original/FTL guidelines and BLT/C.

[Lt1]

Nice write up Tim. I gave this a quick look and my top 4 are 6-8-3-5. I also looked at the 1 and 10 but made them secondary contenders. If payoffs look ok I might take a shot here at some exotics.
Tim

[Mitch44]

Jeebs:


I didn't think there would be time to complete a look at this race as I've been in meetings all day & have one tomorrow afternoon. While away my CP screen has been driving me crazy, I did figure out how to go from 3 views in RDSS to two which helped .However sizing is still giving me issues. Can't maneuver as usual.Driving on.


I agree and believe this race has too many contenders for serious betting and more than the other you recently put up. I prefer less for any serious size bet. It should provide a price but that doesn't always happen even in MD. races. I see some dropdowns but their soundness is always or in most cases ? and will be know after the race.
Contenders:1-3-5-6-8-10 Final order: 8-6-5-3-10


Mitch44

[mick]

Jeebs, you picked a great work-up race.

[Rverge]

well, my 5 contenders 4-6-8-9-10.

[Lt1]

Wow 3min to post wide open so here goes nothing $wp 368,$1ex box 3568 $1exs 3568/110 tot $32.
Tim

[mick]

I had a little something on 8 who I thought ran a good one, but needed less pace pressure.

[Rverge]

5 not on my radar. i guess those ALW race really counted. the 7 was S. ALW.
" "^shrug^ " "

[Rverge]

Originally Posted by mick

I had a little something on 8 who I thought ran a good one, but needed less pace pressure.

5 went off 9/2 missed those odds thought is was lower...