Charlie Davis's Reflections on NHC17

Horseplayers Association of North America board member Charlie Davis finished third in last week's National Handicapping Championship (NHC) and penned the following column about his experience and answered some questions about his preparation, handicapping and strategy that he has received since the event ended. 

This past weekend I came in third in the 17^th NHC tournament. I had a blast, made some new friends, saw a bunch of old friends, and even made some money. Huge congratulations to Paul Matties, the champion, who is an incredible handicapper and contest player.

I want to mention the handicapping programs I use as they’re all invaluable. I use JCapper (a database program which helps me to automate my opinions and quickly look at a race), TimeformUS PP’s (which are by far my favorite PP’s that I’ve ever worked with), and OptixEQ (trip notes and other tools).  One of my strengths is that I know, and acknowledge, my weaknesses. I know I’m not great at trip notes, and don’t have the time to go through and make my own trip notes, so I’m pleased to work with the great team at OptixEQ who make standardized trip notes across the major circuits.

I also want to thank my family for putting up with the long hours and the travel involved in horse racing, and finally John Doyle who’s been a great friend and mentor.

I’ve had a lot of questions about why I picked certain horses, what my thought process was, how I prepare, etc. I figured I’d knock them all out here in one fell swoop. 

Preparation:

I know many people who prep for big tournaments different than they do on a normal day. That doesn’t work for me as I try to stick as close to a normal weekend as possible.  The night before I run through the cards, identify weak favorites, note races with big fields, and exclude races with short fields, dominant favorites, etc. I make sure to get a good rest, I don’t have more than a couple of drinks, and I eat well.

The real work starts in the morning where before scratches I take a look at weather and further refine the races I’m interested in. Then, once scratches come out, I start choosing my races and horses to play.  At this point I take a final look at the OptixEQ trip notes, take another look at the pace to make sure I’m confident in it, and then write down the horse(s) I’m interested in each race.

Before I go down to the contest room, I already have a list of the races I’m likely to play, spreadsheets built so that I know how many races are available, and it’s down to watching the odds and some final decision making in the 10-15 prior to each race. 

Goals/Confidence:

I start by having a goal, and understanding my strengths and weaknesses.  I have daily and overall goals and they allow me to set targets.  My daily goal was at least $100 a day, with $150 being my stretch target, and I wanted to be in first going into the final day. My overall goal was to be in first prior to the final table, and be first prior to the Santa Anita races at the final table.  I know I’m not very good at Santa Anita, and knowing that, I knew I needed to be in front going into those races.

I also am a big believer in the power of positive thinking.  The title of the document where I kept my notes for the weekend is “NHC Champion Interview Notes.”  I’ve seen many good horseplayers lose due to negativity and a lack of belief. Everyone I corresponded with prior to the tournament knows that I said I was going to win. I didn’t, but it helped keep me confident.  It’s not arrogance or a lack of respect for the other players.  Hell, I know a lot of those guys are better handicappers than I am. I had dinner with a good friend (and respected handicapper, who bet on Paul by the way) on Wednesday who said that Paul is the best handicapper he knows.  It’s simply that fact that if you don’t believe in yourself then your chances are slim.

A lot of people think these contests are just about handicapping. They’re not. You have to be able to handicap of course, but you also have to understand value, and not be afraid to have a poor score if the percentages don’t work in your favor.  Many of the best contest players out there either win or end up with really low scores.  Many big names didn’t make the top 10% this weekend and that doesn’t mean they aren’t any good. This is a game of percentages and you have to pick horses that offer value, have confidence in that pick, hope the percentages work out in your favor, and don’t second-guess when they do.

Dealing with Adversity:

I had two things that happened that could’ve put me on tilt.  On tilt in horse racing is different than in poker, but it basically results in a lack of confidence. Lack of confidence means you’re questioning your picks, changing things, etc.

On day 1, in the last race at Aqueduct there was a cap horse that I liked quite a bit. Thunderbumms was the name, and the horse had a bit of an excuse in his last, plus the price was great. I played him on my backup ticket, but not on my primary since there were a few others I liked better later in the day.  I still had four or five optional plays to make, as well as at least four mandatory plays to make at this point. I could’ve been upset and looked at what my score could’ve been, but that’s a great way to lose your confidence. I doubt anyone even knows that I had that horse since I didn’t mention it. As soon as you start talking about what-ifs, it’s impossible to recover.

The second item was a bit harder to recover from. I had a horse that I was waiting for all day. It was Two Ten in the finale at Santa Anita. John Doyle brought this horse up to me first thing in the morning, and the OptixEQ Trip Notes for it were great. I knew all day long that this was going to be my final optional play as long as my position allowed it.   Well, coming into the final race I was behind first by around $4. The horse finished second (unfortunate at the time), but the $5.80 place price was enough to put me in first. Goal accomplished, I was in first going into the final day. Then I saw the scores and heard that I’m not in first, and I realize I never entered the play. I had it in my spreadsheet but never entered it into the contest.   $5.80 might not sound like a lot, but it matters, trust me. You’ll see how much it matters in the next section.

This one wasn’t as easy to brush off because it was a really stupid mistake. It could have been a very costly, stupid mistake.  Once I found out I wasn’t disqualified, I went and had a big glass of scotch, removed the $5.80 from my spreadsheet, and after about an hour, didn’t mention it again.  Thanks to Eric Wing for helping me keep positive.  

I’ve seen so many players lose the plot once they make a mistake or switch horses or anything like that and it’s important to me to keep that negativity out and stay positive.  When it’s a big one, scotch always helps! 

Final Table:

I started out with $10.40 to place on my first race, and then went blanks on the next four races. I was going for the win and was playing horses with a lower probability of winning, but I was passed by two other players during those races.  I was now left with the eighth and ninth at Santa Anita, a track I’m admittedly weak at.  

In the eighth, I was between two horses, the #8 and the #1.  I didn’t like any cap horses and only liked those two horses.  Both horses had OptixEQ trip notes which led me to believe they’d improve. The #8 was 9-1 and the #1 was 3-1.  I absolutely loved the #1 but was leaning towards the #8 due to the price.  This is where strategy comes in. I figured others would be playing the #8 and other price horses to move up on Paul. I knew that I couldn’t make up ground playing the same horses, and there wasn’t a whole lot of downside if I did drop another few spots.  The difference between fifth (where I was), and third was $50K.  The difference between fifth and seventh was $16K.  I played the #1, who narrowly won the race over the #8, and those $13 put me not only in third, but within a $64 cap horse of the leader.  Not a huge score, but it made it so that the $5.80 from the night before didn’t hurt me!

In the ninth I loved the #7, but the odds wouldn’t help me move up. The choice was between protecting with that #7 horse so that the folks behind me couldn’t catch me, or playing a big price in hopes of catching Paul. 

I know Dave Gutfreund well and know that he’s extremely cognizant of value. I also know that the amount of money at stake probably (hopefully) wasn’t enough for him to play for position.  I assumed he would be going for a price, but as soon as the gates opened I asked right away! I was most concerned about him.

I’ve met Duke Matties several times and sat with him at a tournament, but I don’t know him as well. I do know that he’s aggressive in contests. I again assumed he’d go for the win, especially since I assumed his brother would be playing pretty chalky.

The way I handicapped the players in the last race was as follows:

Paul Matties: Horse he thinks is most likely to win.

Roger Cettina: Probably a mid-price horse of which there were many.

Duke Matties: Price horse.

Dave Gutfreund: Price horse.

Because of this, I went with my second favorite price horse, Soi Phet.  I thought others might go with Image of Joplin in hopes of lone speed, so went with the one I thought would be least used.  All of that was for nothing when Soi Phet didn’t figure in the slightest, and Roger in second used him as well, but I accurately handicapped those in fourth and fifth, so was able to retain third. 

Conclusion:

I made $50K on a 3-1 shot, had a great time, and learned a lot about myself in the process.  It was a great tournament, and I have no regrets about any horse I played the entire tournament.  I’m honored to have been at the final table with such a great group of handicappers, and feel no shame in losing to Paul.  I guess my only regret is that my backers in the futures bet lost their money!

Selling Horse Racing as a Gambling Game of Skill A First Step -by Andy Asaro

Those of us who love the game often say that horse racing is the greatest gambling game of skill ever created. But in 2015, gambling on horse racing - when compared to other games of skill that are thriving -  is becoming one of the worst games for customers and non-rebated gamblers who are charged retail takeout rates.  This is due, in part, to prohibitive pricing (high takeouts), difficult multi-leg hard to hit exotics, the proliferation of jackpot bets, and the complexity of analyzing the data from past performances.  This has caused even the most experienced gamblers to have a much more difficult time just breaking even. 

When most of us learned the game and fell in love with racing we had a choice of wagering to Win, Place, or Show, along with two exactas per day with maybe one Daily Double.  In the late 1970's it was much easier to make it through the learning curve, simply because we cashed more tickets.  We became life-long customers by enjoying the great experience of solving the puzzle that is each race, and of cashing tickets at a rate that at the very least gave us the impression that we had a good chance to win.

The Industry has reached a point where it must "sink or swim" based on a model without alternative gaming revenue like slot revenue, or instant racing, or online poker.  It is evident that there will come a day when those revenues will decrease or go away completely.  Because California racing does not receive alternative gaming revenues I believe that California is ground zero in the fight for the future of Horse Racing. California racing must proceed on a sustainable model based on earning revenues directly and indirectly from gambling on horse racing alone. I would argue that an optimal pricing experiment is significantly more important in California precisely because there is no alternative gaming revenue. 

The best way to begin an optimal takeout experiment in California is to eliminate breakage on Win, Place, and Show (currently 15.43% takeout) AND to lower exacta takeout to 16%.  I believe that this experiment makes sense for a couple of reasons:

For decades, "breakage" for most experienced horseplayers has been synonymous with "stealing".  A simple change to eliminate breakage on WPS bets by paying to the penny will be one of the most talked about stories of 2016.

Horseplayers everywhere will not only applaud the change, they will support the first jurisdiction to eliminate breakage on Win, Place, and Show with their gambling dollars.  

The objection to eliminating breakage is that there are worthy causes who need the revenue from breakage.  The best example of a worthy cause is financial assistance for backstretch workers and their families. By eliminating breakage on WPS, revenue that was once derived from breakage will now need to be shifted to revenue derived from takeout. 

Second, California racing must shift from a prohibitive 22.68% takeout on exactas to an industry low 16% takeout.  We know from prior analysis that handle would have to increase approximately 30% to be revenue neutral.  Over time it is my view that handle will increase in two horse exotics by more than 30%, and the goodwill lost from past moves in California (e.g. the 2010 takeout hike) will serve California well long-term.  

These are the risks that need to be taken if California intends to be a viable industry three, five, or ten years from now. 

The most common objections for these specific recommendations are that they will cannibalize other wagers and total revenue will drop.  It is true that your current customers will shift some of their play to these lower takeout and easier to hit higher churn wagers, but at an optimal takeout rate like 16% exacta churn can be like a snowball going downhill.  And, when you hit an attractive price point, academic gambling research (including studies commissioned in California as far back as the late 1980's) shows handle and revenue will grow for an extended period of time.  That is the sensible way to increase handle, revenues, and market share that is already being cannibalized by the competition. For California racing to succeed it must be first to make these changes. 

It is imperative that at the same time these recommendations are put into place the industry must begin to change the way it currently promotes horse racing.  People love to gamble and they love gambling games of skill. There must be concerted efforts from organizations like America's Best Racing and the Jockey Club to promote Win, Place, and Show wagers, along with other low takeout and high churn wagers.  Selling horse racing as a great gambling game of skill and allowing people to experience the excitement and fun of higher churn, lower takeout wagers, will without a doubt increase interest from new players the industry needs. 

Together, with a strong industry push and a two-pronged attack that encompasses fair pricing and aggressive marketing, we believe this strategy will be a winning one.

Optimal Takeout (Defined)

The price point that drives total wagering handle upward to where total long term revenue becomes maximized for tracks, horsemen, and governments.

---

Note: Selling Horse Racing as a Gambling Game of Skill A First Step was written by Andy Asaro. For those of you who might not know Andy is a horseplayer advocate and proud HANA member who lives in southern California. Andy is passionate about California Racing and in my opinion has some solid ideas about how Track Management, The CHRB, and the TOC can get on the same page and get California Racing off the path of the status quo and onto a path to success.

After reading what Andy has written, I decided two things. First, I agree with just about every word, and second. that I would run his recommendations here on the HANA Blog.

Jeff Platt, HANA President

Player Spotlight Segment: Emily Gullikson

We recently did a “Player Spotlight” segment with Emily Gullikson.  Emily is a relatively new horseplayer, and we asked her about what got her involved in horse racing, what her handicapping process is, and some other info. 

Q:  How long have you been handicapping? How did you get the bug?

A:  I am still relatively new to handicapping, playing for just about five years. My background and career is in athletics. I spent a lot of my childhood around horses. I rode hunter/jumper and worked at the barn, I would be there all day with horses. I went to the local track a few years ago and what got me hooked was the Racing Form and the handicapping aspect. I did not know anyone at the time that was into racing. I read books, and searched out anything I could that would help me learn. I’ve been a full-fledged player ever since. 

Q:  What type of handicapper would you generally be described as? Are you a data cruncher, angles, pace, speed, watch replays, or a pure combination of them?

A:  Form cycle. I’m looking at a lot of different factors such as replays, trainer angles, pace, and performance figures to assess a horses’ form and condition going into the race. Watching replays is a big part of that. One of the roles I have at OptixEQ is writing trip notes. I have watched, without exaggeration, thousands of races and race replays this year covering Gulfstream, NYRA tracks, CD and Keeneland. Writing trip notes is a lot more in depth that just picking up on the winner, and the obvious trouble. It is important I watch every performance and grade that effort properly. Within the notes, I will include projections such as, shorter, needs to add/remove blinkers, needs a drop. The visual aspect has become a huge part of my handicapping. 

Q:  In your Twitter bio it seems you are competitive by nature (sports, fitness). If so, do you think being competitive is a reason why you enjoy the pursuit of handicapping?

A:  Playing in handicapping tournaments certainly brings out my competitive side. I’m semi-retired from actively participating in sports. That urge to “train” and “compete” is engaged when gearing up to play a tournament. I play better when I’m sharp and mentally prepared. The preparation and steps involved getting ready for a big handicapping tournament are very similar when I got ready for a game day. 

Q:  What do you most like about horse racing?

A:  Earlier today backed at 6/1 at Belmont. I watched as this “best bet of the day” stumbled out of the gate and instantly lost all chance. Immediately followed that up in the next race, with 26/1 tourney horse that absolutely stood in the gate, spotted the field, made a late rally to get up for fourth and then galloped out past the winner.

One of the most memorable times in my life came standing on the winner’s circle rail watching Zenyatta in the 2010 Vanity. Horse racing, in mere seconds, can bring out every possible emotion. There is nothing like it. 

Q:  What do you think can be improved in the sport for someone like you, as a customer?

A:  From a handicapping and player aspect I would like to have more information available about the horse on race day. This includes equipment changes, such as a first time starter debuting in blinkers, the addition or removal of front wraps, and shoe information/changes. When a horse is scratched by the veterinarian the reason for the scratch should be listed. Along those lines, I would be interested in knowing the weight of the horse coming into race.

Another improvement that should be implemented is the way inquiries and objections are handled. Ideally, we could be watching the video as the stewards are watching the video, listening to their discussions, along with the phone conversations with the jockeys involved.

This piece appeared in the October edition of Horseplayer Monthly.  To read the rest of the issue, FOR FREE, please click here.

Press Release - For Immediate Release From HANA

 Keeneland’s Breeders’ Cup Takeout Is Arbitrarily Increased for Customers North of the Border

HANA Calls For Canadian Pari-Mutuel Agency, Woodbine to Respond to Customer Pricing Concerns

For Immediate Release

(October 29, 2015, Keswick, VA, The Horseplayers Association of North America): The Woodbine Entertainment Group, the entity which Canadian horseplayers, through live, OTB and Internet, wager on horse racing, has announced the betting menu for the 2015 Breeders’ Cup has been significantly changed.

Takeout rates for the 19% trifecta, superfecta and pick 3 pools at Keeneland have been increased to 27%, place and show from 16% to 18%, and two horses exotics, super high 5, pick 4 and 5, from 19% to 20%. Only win and the pick 6 were left the same as the host track. 

“Woodbine drew the ire of many this spring when they created a new pick 5 with 25% takeout, which was well above the industry standard of 15%. Now in the fall we see Breeders’ Cup takeouts have been massively increased. We at the Horseplayers’ Association of North America call on Woodbine and the Canadian Pari-mutuel Agency (CPMA) to address these issues. These are policies that are driving more and more horseplayers to other games of skill, further eroding horse racing’s betting customer base, and hurting the entire industry,” said Horseplayers Association of North America President Jeff Platt. 

“According to their release, Woodbine said they are instituting this new measure in part because of “significant taxes” that are applied on wagers that are not seen in the US. The truth of the matter is, in Canada, and Ontario, only 0.5% of every dollar wagered goes to the provincial government, with 0.8% to the federal government. Simulcast deals made between Woodbine and horsemen groups which penalize horseplayers are on them, not on the customer, and should’ve been updated long ago to reflect the 21^st century simulcast market,” added Platt. 

In Canada, horseplayers cannot patronize a competitor this weekend to escape the high takeouts and lower payoffs. Woodbine has a monopoly on pari-mutuel horse racing wagering in the country. 

For more information please contact info@hanaweb.org

 

For the web link for the above release, please visit here:

The Horseplayers Association of North America is a grassroots group of more than 3,000 horseplayers. HANA believes that both tracks and horseman groups have become bogged down with industry infighting and have completely forgotten something: The importance of the customer. HANA hopes, through proactive change on several key issues (including but not limited to), open signal access, lower effective takeouts, affordable data, transparent medication reform and customer appreciation, the industry’s handle losses can be reversed.

Weekend Preview - Suffolk Downs Trying 15% Takeouts

While much of the attention in horse racing will be focused on Keeneland and Belmont, Suffolk Downs will be hosting their second of three planned race cards this year on Saturday afternoon starting at 12:30, and this time they will be having 15% across the board takeouts.

"We appreciate the Massachsuetts Gaming Commission working with us on the takeout reduction," Suffolk Downs chief operating officer Chip Tuttle said in the article linked above. "Historically, even when we had relatively larger field size, it's not as if we've ever had a signal that was in high demand due to the purse levels. On Saturday we'll be returning 85% (of money wagered) to the bettors, and it will be interesting to see if there is a positive response."

This takeout reduction at Suffolk is a unique opportunity for horseplayers to really get value across the board, but especially in three pools - exactas, trifectas, and superfectas.  According to our chart, 15% is the lowest exacta rake by over 3% and the lowest trifecta and superfecta rate by 4%. 

Field size is also strong, with an average of 9.1 starters in the 12 races, and seven of the 12 races have fields of ten or larger before scratch time.

So while we certainly understand that Keeneland and Belmont will get the bulk of the wagering dollars this weekend, we thought we would let you know about this chance to play these races at Suffolk, given the rare chance to play into some low-rake pools.  Whatever you decide, best of luck with all your wagers this weekend.

Your HANA Team

Member Poll Results: 4 in 5 Support USADA Framework

In July a poll was issued regarding the Barr-Tonko Bill, which would allow US Anti Doping Agency to create the Thoroughbred Horseracing Anti-Doping Organization. This would be an independent, non-governmental, non-profit governed by a board comprised of six USADA board members, along with individuals from the Thoroughbred racing industry.

 The results of the poll showed 83% support from horseplayers.

The full poll, along with comments from you, is published in today's Horseplayer Monthly magazine, a free downloadable emagazine, that you can get here. 

Also in this month's magazine - A Q and A with TimeformUS's chief figure maker, a preview of tomorrow's big Kentucky Downs meet, handicapping tips, horseplayer news, and much more.

Research: Slot Revenues Are Hurt By Increasing Takeouts

The Association of Gaming Equipment Manufacturers on Wednesday announced the results of a report by Las Vegas-based Applied Analysis about the nation's slot machine industry. The results will be no surprise to horseplayers:

"“While statistical correlations on a state-by-state basis vary due to any number of factors, the broader, aggregate trends would suggest a rising hold percentage has not translated into incremental gaming revenue for operators during the post-recession era,” the report concludes. “In fact, they very well may be contributing to its decline.”

Often, the horse racing industry discusses takeout reductions and makes conclusions in rudimentary fashion, i.e. if a super high five bet's rake drops from 15% to 10% and does not attract more dollars, people do not care about takeout. This, as the above study shows, is exactly not the way to look at it. It needs to be looked through a gambling lens. It's about hundreds and hundreds of exactas paying $40 instead of $50, which over time, degrades bankrolls, where bettors feel they have little chance to beat a game.

Interestingly enough, racinos in Florida bucked the trend. They lowered takeout by a whopping 32% since 2006 and increased revenue from slot machines.

Slot machine users, like scratch lottery users have been defined as "non-price sensitive". They might not make decisions based on a hidden hold, but they know when they're broke too often. When they do, they stop playing. Horseplayers - in fact, all gamblers - act the exact same way.

8% (Harness) Takeout High Five Debuts at the Meadowlands

EAST RUTHERFORD, NJ – This past Saturday night, one lucky player cashed the jackpot Super Hi-Five in the last race at The Meadowlands for over $173,000.  The wager was placed through TVG by a bettor in Virginia.  It was the second time this meet that a person took home over six figures on the Jackpot Super Hi-Five Wager.

Given that there are only ten racing dates remaining in the 2015 Championship Meet, rather than begin a new jackpot pool with only one month to build that pool, The Meadowlands has made some changes to its wagering format.

The fifth race will continue to offer a Super Hi-Five each night, but there will be no jackpot carryover pool.  The pool will pay out each and every night and it will carry an industry-low eight-percent (8%) takeout rate.  It will be offered at the $.20 cent minimum.

The Meadowlands races Friday and Saturday through the Hambletonian in early August.  8% takeout on this bet is the lowest takeout offered on any bet, in North America, Thoroughbred or Standardbred.

Betting Favorites

 by Vin Rogers

   Ten or 15 years ago I had a horse with Mitch Friedman named Call Me Anytime.  It was Saratoga time, and "Call Me," an honest $35,000 claimer type, was entered in the fifth race on the second Monday of the meet.  Come Monday, I made may way to Mitch's barn near the Oklahoma training track.  He was relaxing for a moment with a cup of coffee.  We chatted for a while, and then I asked, "So, how do you think Call Me will do today?"
"He'll piss all over that bunch," he answered.
   At post time Call Me Anytime was the favorite, hovering around even money, 7/5, 8/5...
   I headed to the windows and bet $200 to win.  The race went off; Jorge Chavez was riding.  He made a move on the far turn and demolished the field, winning by an increasing six lengths.  I happily cashed my $425 ticket.
   Now it's commonly accepted among sophisticated horseplayers, including me, that betting favorites is a reliable and dependable way to go broke.  But there are times when rules must be broken.  My dad made a habit of breaking them.

Uncle Franco
   It was the 1940s.  The place was Jamaica, New York.  My dad was a horseplayer who frequented Aqueduct, Belmont, and the now-defunct Jamaica track.  He was a pharmacist by trade, but everyone called him "Doc."  He wanted to be a physician, but the money for medical school just wasn't there, so pharmacy had to do.
  His store - a two-pharmacist operation that was much more drugstore than supermarket - was minutes away from where the action was.  He'd make weekly visits to the track in season (racing shut down in November and didn't start up again until April), sometimes taking me along.
   I was six or seven at the time, and of course, I fell madly in love with everything I saw at the track:  the horses, jocks, the silks, the glamour and excitement of the crowds (yes, there were crowds in the 1940s - even on weekdays).
   The country was slowly emerging from the deepest depression ever, but my pharmacist dad was doing okay.  People needed what he had to sell, and for many, he was a substitute for the emergency room.  He was, among our struggling extended family, a singular success story.  When an aunt, uncle, sister, or cousin needed help, they came to Doc, and he usually delivered, much like a non-violent version of Don Corleone in The Godfather.  I think he enjoyed that role - reveled in it in fact - except for the occasional challenges from a notorious uncle known only as "Franco."
   As I remember it, Uncle Franco had been deported to Italy for crimes short of murder and mayhem but serious enough to warrant deportation.  Italy proved to be a fertile ground for his unconventional talents.  The rumor, never confirmed, was that he was involved in some aspect of the drug trade.  In any case, he prospered, and his wealth and connections enabled him to make periodic visits to the family in the U.S., despite his official deportation.
   He would come two or three times a year, stay a week or so, and entertain lavishly:  limos, Broadway shows, elegant dining, and dollar bills for me and my cousins.  My dad was, for a little while, second banana in the family hierarchy - a role he refused to accept.  So, shortly after Franco's inevitable departure back to the Old Country, Doc would respond.  He'd rent a Long Island beach house and put up everyone for a week or so, or he might pay for a weekend in Atlantic City, which was far more glamorous then than it is now.  He'd simply "out-Franco" Franco.  Now, how did he do it?  Business was good at the drugstore but not that good.  Doc needed a supplementary source of income to support these expenditures. 
   Enter Hall-of-Fame trainer "Sunny" Jim Fitzsimmons.

"Sunny" Jim
   Mr. Fitz trained Gallant Fox, Nashua, and Bold Ruler, among other great Thoroughbreds.  He won three Derbys, four Preaknesses, and six Belmonts.  Brooklyn-born, he lived in Sheepshead Bay for all of his 91 years.  He was a gregarious native son who really made it big - and, of course, he was one of Doc's heroes (along with "old banana nose" Eddie Arcaro).
   One September day during Belmont's fall meeting, Doc settled into his box and discovered his neighbor was indeed the legendary Sunny Jim - sitting along with his field glasses at the ready.  Doc introduced himself, and the two struck up a conversation.  Both Brooklyn-born, they hit it off, and Doc became a welcome visitor to Mr. Fitz's barn.
   In fact, Sunny Jim could always count on a visit whenever the infamous Franco had been in town.  Within days of Franco's departure, Doc would show up at the barn, and within a month, he'd get a phone call from someone that went, as I remember it, something like this:
   "The boss says that Jiminy Cricket is kicking his stall apart - he looks to be in great shape for the fifth at Aqueduct on Friday.
   Or:  "Pretty Penny did five furlongs in 59 flat yesterday - she should breeze against that bunch on Saturday."
   I'll never know for sure who called, but I do know that after these calls, Doc, usually a $5 or $10 bettor, headed for the track with a stuffed wallet at the ready.
   The Jiminy Crickets and Pretty Pennys never went off at anything higher than even money; most were 4/5, even 3/5.  Nevertheless, Doc would confidently go to the windows and place $1,000 or sometimes $2,000 to win on Sunny Jim's horses.  This of course would be comparable to my betting $15,000 today - an amount absolutely unimaginable to me.  As a university professor, I'd guess my income (adjusted for inflation) might be similar to what Doc's was seven decades ago, but I'd lack both the courage and confidence to do it - not Doc:  he had both in abundance, due in part to his complete and utter trust in his good friend Sunny Jim.
   So Doc would place his bets early - there was no way he was getting shut out - then he'd go down to the rail and quietly watch his horses run, and win, two or three times each year.
   Did they ever lose?
   I suppose so but not often enough to offset the stream of winners that came home - almost certainly - from the Fitzsimmons barn.  Within days of a Fitz-inspired win, Doc would throw a bigger and better party than the upstart Franco, and he'd be the head honcho yet again in town - and he did it all by betting favorites.
   Horseplayer Monthly readers are much too smart to bet their money on short-priced favorites on a daily basis.  Indeed, most of us spend our handicapping time figuring out way to beat the favorite.  But if Todd Pletcher were my buddy, and two or three times a year he told me that one of his horses would "piss all over that bunch" (well, Todd probably wouldn't put it exactly that way), I think I'd put some significant money on his horse - favorite or not.

   About the author - Vin Rogers is a retired UCONN professor of Education, a jazz trumpeter, an ex-equestrian, and Thoroughbred owner.  He finds handicapping endlessly fascinating and hopes someday to learn how to do it.

This article appeared in the June edition of Horseplayer Monthly.  To read the rest of the issue, FOR FREE, please click here.