FG 4

Brutal sequence with four two-turners and difficult pace scenarios.

Leg one: (7) GROOVY SCENE will not take a bunch of money but is not without a chance. Homebred is a half to a multiple SW with same trainer and rider. Briefly chased a nice filly in her turf debut then was given a race at Churchill on two year old day. She broke poorly that day yet set a blistering pace before caving in. After a month, she breezed awful in Hot Springs but Nicks shipped anyway and had to run when the off the turf heat scratched from ten down to five. Twenty well spaced morning furlongs later she shows up today in a field void of any pace and should sit a good trip for a very clever outfit. Adding four others 'Aidan, 'Jack "Anne and well bred firster Dress Uniform who scratched out of a similar spot earlier this month when the race came off.

(8) Ketchikan will be favored and probably should be but he is our single and is a bit unappetizing: first try two bends and beat nothing in his debut! Nevertheless he will stretch as a three quarter brother to Remsen runnerup Un Fino Vino and second dam has produced a horse of the year in Hong Kong and Ky Oaks queen Blusking K. D. Pinhooked for 100K, storage magnate Hughes went down for 500K and Mr. Greeley colt has always looked the part. Larry M. on board for facile maiden romp and this jock can get most anything to settle. Sufficient pace signed on for rally but giving away seasoning and likely very short on the board.

(9) GOLDEN GLEN is a good racehorse, gets Talamo and should be closest to lone speed no chance superstone. Forestry 6yo came off the shelf and cruised at CD for 50K and this spot may be easier. Anything resembling his last behind wire to wire monster suffices as only tagged horse. Adding 3-18 He's A Royal Dee who would need some luck but when right this good. Mouton/Perrodin gelding been second twice, third twice and forth twice this class and has run par in all of them.

(10) Bayou bred straight maiden brings SWITCH GRASS GAS and his customary last to somewhere finish. Richie very reliable conditioner, Campbell on board for the sixth straight heat and Malagra colt always fires...should not be a maiden much longer. Adding PELTO who had an usual trip in his debut and Lasix usually moves this type up. Call it 1,2,5,7,9 / 6 / 5,6 / 2,3 A bit short on time. Good cappin. BBB

[Kasept]

BBB,

Solid try for $20.. Turned out favorite was as far you needed to go in that first leg, which is always maddening.. Thing paid well too...

[blackthroatedwind]

This is not meant as a personal criticism, however it may be taken, but as an explanation as to why this is a perfect example of my prior criticisms of this poster's methods. You simply cannot be successful playing Pick-4s for the modest amounts this poster recommends. It is not so much that you will lose, but you will NOT win, as in this case this player should have hit the Pick-4 and collected over $600. Making up $20 may not be that hard, but making up the squandered $600 will prove impossible over time.

Hitting these multi-race bets ( specifically Pick-4s and Pick-6s ) is about two things.....having one good opinion ( MAYBE two for the Pick-6 ) and surviving the other races. This poster passed the first test with flying colors, as he found his single, and that horse won ( in this case at a very square 3-1 ). His opinion is quite obviously good. However, he failed the important test, which is using this excellent opinion to make money. And, why did he fail this test ( and not collect over $600 )? Because his play was weak and did not offer him the opportunity to cash.

Specifically, personally I think he played the first leg well, as he did not have a grasp on the race, and covered himself well. However, after that he was weak.....and why? Because he didn't bet enough combinations ( or commit enough money ). You can't go 2 x 2 and really expect to win these bets over time. You will almost always get tripped up in one ( if not both ) legs. And, while most of the time it won't matter, as your single will have lost, and you may think it was wise that you saved an additional $20-$30, this is not the case, as what happened today was that he lost 20 to 30 future $20-$30 plays. In other words, for an addition $25 today he could have gone 3 x 3 and very well have hit this thing, and thus received $600 more to invest in the future. And, with that additional money to invest, with a good opinion he may well parlay it into even more wins.

I am not saying he would have won today, and maybe he feels he couldn't have used the winner he missed, but over time he will give himself a much greater chance of hitting if his opinion is as solid as it was today. The idea is to make money and one does this by taking advantage of good opinions.

The guy claims to spend a minimum of four hours handicapping these races and I have no reason to doubt him. After doing that he valued his time at $5 an hour by investing only $20 into the Pick-4. Our time, and in his case expertise, is much more valuable than that.

[hailrazer]

Originally Posted by hoovesupsideyourhead

spend some money ya cheap bastard..no one cares that you missed it for 20 bucks ..hit it for 48..duh

I understand that you don't believe his claims about figures from last year. Your disdain for his lengthy analysis is comprehendable. But I can't figure why ya'll (hooves and BTW) keep beating up on this guy. He doesn't come back and argue with you and he just keeps making picks. I volunteer to take the heat from here on out. After looking at my results from last year, I see that I placed 20 wagers of $4 to win for a total of $80 risked. I only hit at 30% but those 6 winners brought me back $52,442. I am kind of pissed because I got nosed out of another winner that would have boosted earnings up to $140,000+.

I seldom post picks but I follow most of the touts put up here. I think BBB does a good job with his picks. Even if you can't stomach BBB's claims about last year's results, I imagine you could ignore his posts instead of trying to run him off.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by hailrazer

I understand that you don't believe his claims about figures from last year. Your disdain for his lengthy analysis is comprehendable. But I can't figure why ya'll (hooves and BTW) keep beating up on this guy. He doesn't come back and argue with you and he just keeps making picks. I volunteer to take the heat from here on out. After looking at my results from last year, I see that I placed 20 wagers of $4 to win for a total of $80 risked. I only hit at 30% but those 6 winners brought me back $52,442. I am kind of pissed because I got nosed out of another winner that would have boosted earnings up to $140,000+.

I seldom post picks but I follow most of the touts put up here. I think BBB does a good job with his picks. Even if you can't stomach BBB's claims about last year's results, I imagine you could ignore his posts instead of trying to run him off.

Your silly assertions aside, my response was an attempt to help someone who has a good opinion, but doesn't know how to bet, perhaps at least lose a little less. His handicapping seems decent but he can never win betting in the manner he does. Perhaps he still won't win if he were to actually think about my post but it MIGHT help him have at least a chance.

BBB hasn't demonstrated that he deserves thoughtful responses, as he takes cheap shots at many different posters, and refuses to engage in dialogue, but as many people read this board I thought at least I could attempt to offer some thoughts. I don't suggest they are the be all and end all towards winning but perhaps they might at least help lead someone in the right direction. As someone who bets real money on a daily basis, and has at least had his share of success, I know that today's " wager " by BBB was at best a squandered opportunity.

As an aside, there are many people on this site who bet frequently and other than BBB and his cohorts NONE of them constantly talk about their supposed wins. I can't answer for others but maybe they don't need to try to convince themselves of anything.

If instead of lecturing, with no dialogue, BBB would like to engage in a real discussion about multi-race betting strategy I, at least, think that would be a real asset to the site.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

I thought at least I could attempt to offer some thoughts. I don't suggest they are the be all and end all towards winning but perhaps they might at least help lead someone in the right direction.
As an aside, there are many people on this site who bet frequently and other than BBB and his cohorts NONE of them constantly talk about their supposed wins. I can't answer for others but maybe they don't need to try to convince themselves of anything.

If instead of lecturing, with no dialogue, BBB would like to engage in a real discussion about multi-race betting strategy I, at least, think that would be a real asset to the site.

Andy -- it's true. The SA carryover gave us a great discussion on the forum, and I think that as far as multi-race wagers are concerned, almost all of us have at least a bit to learn, myself very much included.

Your opinions may not be the be all end all of a multi-race wager discussion, but the conversation you and I had about them helped me hit a pick-3 at Fairgrounds afterwards....twice, by structuring a ticket the way we had discussed after reviewing the way I had originally been constructing them.

So with that said, no you don't definitively have the last word....but by all means you're one of the ones to look to around here for help....I humbly admit.

[hailrazer]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

I'm confused. Legitimately. 20 wagers at $4 apiece.

A little bit of math concludes this HailRazer.

So, you say that you only hit 30% of those wagers. Let's play fantasy here and say that you hit ALL of them! Every single one of them. As in 100%, 20 out 20, etc.

EVEN if you hit EVERY single one of your "20 wagers of $4 to win," each of those horses would have had to have gone off at an AVERAGE of 654-1. Yes, if you had hit every one of those twenty wagers, those horses would each have had to have paid on average, at odds of 654-1!!!!

So let's get back to the fact that you only hit 30% of them. That means your six winners hit at an average of 2184-1?!

What tracks do you play, and what service carries them...because apparently there are $4,300 winners to be had for a measly two bucks out there somewhere!!!!!!!!!!!

I thought I would stump you for sure with this one, but alas, math has once again prevailed....

I actually am lucky to play less than 20 races a day. I don't wager a lot, but win bets do generally average more than $4 and I've never hit a horse over 70-1

I've been exposed. Do with me what you will.

Some fifteen or so years ago I became strictly a horizontal player and would estimate 98% of my bets are pick 4's or win bets. In fact, I was at Latonia for the first pick 3 the state of Kentucky ever offered and hit it for less than $200; even with a $27 horse involved. Driving back to Lexington I became convinced the bet was a ripoff!

That quick, emotional assessment proved quite inaccurate and with the advent of the pick 4, I became a winning player. I would not claim that I was "country before country was cool" but I do have some advantages and exploit them as best I can. Unlike its big brother the Pick 4 requires little investment, yet tons of study and by staying in the midwest I avoid the move up trainers that are ubiquitous on both coasts and the deep pocketed "wise" guys who permeate the large pools.

Prattle aside, hitting any vertical wager is more about eliminating horses than selecting winners. Yesterdays sequence was difficult on its face but as often happens somewhat vanilla when the dust had settled.

Leg one was maiden fillies going a couple of bends on the lawn and it was, as most grass heats can be, the race to spread. As usual, the money the public bets wins a third of the time and this heat fooled no one with the choice winning and the runnerups both three to one. At this point our quest for a good score was gone.

Leg two was just an awful heat but did feature a horse with a future (Ketchikan) and the Mr. Greeley sophomore delivered nicely giving his connections a very pleasant problem of "whats next". Contrary to one of the posters implying that I had a solid opinion in this leg, I did not! The poster assumed, incorrectly, that because I singled here, that it was my strongest opinion of the sequence. In fact, it was my weakest!

Tangently, leg three was my strongest opinion. I felt I was about 75% safe to advance thru this leg with my two plays, a huge stance. As a general rule taking the top two favorites will "win" the race about half the time. From a handicapping standpoint Superstone was lone speed in a two turn race and had no chance, yet his uncoupled stablemate won. Sidcup had few positives, Crossword did not figure at all, yet went favored and 'Toga scratched. The winner could have certainly been played but my analysis went as follows: Recall my poorly worded, yet useful post on the other side of this forum regarding the "task at hand" as this race offered "Bobby" a choice. As the owner/trainer of Home of Stars he had two options; 1) enter for nw3 other than, or 2) enter for 50K. He chose the former. Bear in mind, for this condition book, the Fairgrounds added State Bred to their conditions and that allowed the Illinin bred 'Stars to compete but not be tagged. I felt the horse who had not won in some 17 months could have been safely entered for 50K and then run back in the same class using the nw3x criteria. Additionally, 'Stars was a vet scratch on 1/22/07 in the same class, AND a vet scratch on 2/5/07 when entered for 50K. Sometimes you can over analyze but I have no sour grapes here other than letting this top shelf conditioner beat me!

The last leg was never more than two deep and I came close to singling the winner and would have, if I could have found other options in the other legs.
Swich Grass Gas went two turns for the first time two weeks ago and the race was much better than it looked on paper. This horse is bred for two turns and his first against fellow bayou breds showed a powerful rally from nowhere to runnerupville. Then he caught some monsters while always finishing, a commodity that many Louisiana breds lack. I added Pelto off the strength of first Lasix, being very well bet for his debut and stretching out with his Mr. P on top of 'Slew pedigree. As in his debut, he was a handful for Lonnie and may need another before firing his best. Playing the FG4 manana but have to navigate a championship basketball game, then Syracuse vs. Connecticut, then a Mardi Gras party later tonite. Still sight unseen, like my chances.

As for the respondents: K'Sept I would have almost settled for the favorite in leg one but had a question on who it would be. The winner was 3-1 into the gate, 5-2 out of it and finally 9-5 in deep stretch. For BTW I would relish a discussion on structuring multi race tickets as I have much to learn and yet will bring plenty to the table. I would request you stop calling me a "ridiculous liar" as I post ALL my bets. You can count on me hitting a pick 4 every month or so and banking at least ten grand by years end. As for being a cheap shot artist, I am not at all politically correct, and am deeply opinionated yet sorry if I offended anyone.

As for the two respondents who claim personal offense, I let you slide on on your selection and bet of a horse at FG last Sunday. The horse had ZERO chance, yet one of you claimed to bet $200 and the other made lame excuses after the drubbing. Both of you could use some instruction on how movement of the turf rail affects outcomes as one entire forum had the $25 winner! Good cappin. BBB

[blackthroatedwind]

Since you just claimed you post " all your bets ", yet have continued to insist on substantial results, yet have not posted winning bets HERE, I would have to say that while " substantial liar " may not be a kind assessment it certainly seems accurate as long as you continue to insist on successes that have simply not been substantiated. Sorry, but coming in AFTER races and referring others to some board we neither know of or care about does not substantiate anything. However, none of that really has anything to do with race and betting analysis so I am willing to let it go. I wish you success and like most honestly don't care how you have done in the past either positively or negatively.

More importantly, on the subject at hand, which is multi-race wagering, while I strongly agree that winning these bets centers more around eliminating horses than necessarily picking winners, I just as strongly disagree with your notion that small investments will produce good results over time. Not only is this not possible, it will result in a player missing substantial payoffs they would have been garnered had they played more responsibly and bet more money. The Pick-4 and Pick-6 are quite simply NOT bets that can be conquered with a small bankroll. The problem is not that you might not occasionally hit, it is really that you will miss out on winnings you should have had. I know I keep repeating this but I strongly believe it is a CRUCIAL point.

One manner where this can be accomplished is playing multiple tickets, where you narrow down three of the legs and open up the fourth. In your play yesterday you could have played three or four tickets....the original one opened up the first leg so it may well have covered that race, and as you singled the second you could have lived with that as a stand alone, and the other two could have been variations of the first ticket where you individually opened up the third and fourth legs. This would have given you very strong coverage in a play where it turned out your single was powerful.

The idea is not to prove anything when we bet.....the idea is singular and serious....and that is to WIN. In order to have any real chance to win over time in these bets you have to wager very well. Betting $12 to $24 will quite simply not allow you to wager well as you will most certainly ALWAYS be weak in at least two legs. Over time you cannot overcome this.

I apologize if you feel insulted by any of my words and hope we can move this conversation past a need to claim past successes and try to move everyone here, ourselves included, to a better level of play. Ultimately, isn't that the goal for all of us?

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by bellsbendboy

The poster assumed, incorrectly, that because I singled here, that it was my strongest opinion of the sequence. In fact, it was my weakest!

In all seriousness here, no bashing at all.

Did I misunderstand the quote posted above, or do I really just have THAT much to learn about multi-race wagers?

Is it common practice for people to single on the leg in which they have the least conviction?

It seems counterintuitive to me.....is this running rampant in the game and I just don't know about it?

[SentToStud]

I disagree as strongly as possible that there is no room for a $24 (or thereabouts) per $1 play in a successful pick-4 strategy.

During my meet I play a lot of these tight tickets. I won't get into any discussion regarding success levels because nobody should care and what happened in the past doesn't predict the future.

There is a specific scenario I look for to play a short ticket. Specifically,
1. Spread race 1st or 2nd in the sequence and I can exclude a perceived bad chalk.
2. I have a solid single.
3. I can go 2 or 3 deep in the other two legs with the following caveats:
a. in at least one of the legs I can exclude what I believe will be a bad short priced horse
b. I'm not "drawing straws" to throw the last exclude out of the boat in those legs.

At the level I wager, I will play a short ticket 3-5 times.

If a p-4 does not fit the above, I'll tier using more runners and spend more per $1 unit. Or I will pass.

Not every p-4 pays $5,000. If I think the sequence fits the profile above, I will look to cash multiple times on a smaller per $1 wager.

And while I don't think it's a big factor, I guess there is something to be said for cashing 5 tickets @ $500 per vs one ticket for $2,500.

I have had this exact conversation several times with people I respect. I think it comes down to "fear of regret" theory. Do I ever regret not spending another $20, $40, etc... additional on a ticket when I narrowly missed? Sure I do . But I don't care. I'll rue my loss for a minute and move on. I WILL go back and think about how I evaluated the wager as being one that merited a tight ticket but that's it.

However you all play, good luck.

BTW I read sometime back where you posted that Pat Day was NOT a great rider! With that said, no need to apologize for insulting me.

BSpencer: I cannot comment on your grasp of horizontal wagering and can only offer my own opinion. Although Ketchikan was the only horse I could have played in that leg, he did not have to win. I was much more confident in the other legs admittedly because of spreading. Most pick 4 players and almost all pick six players outspend their competition as their edge; my approach is to out handicap them. Empirically, singling the favorite will clear the race some thirty percent of the time, and taking the top two selections some fifty percent.

Stud: From a previous post where you listed the turf rail placements at your track I assume your "meet" is Calder. I certainly agree if you do not have a winning ticket in your "first" $24 the law of diminishing returns kicks in. Your tenets make sense and all 'cappers have them. I select a day to play, and play regardless of conviction. In fact probably playing FG Tuesday which would be the first Tuesday play since election day last year. Among my favorite tenets would be to look for a solid favorite to single! Perhaps some 70 percent of races are decided at the time of entry and the multi-race player can capitalize here. Also a change in the turf rail can make a horse highly unlikely even if they look very solid on paper. I also will spread or single in any leg.
Lastly I as well have a thick skin and do not rue tough beats very long. BBB

[SentToStud]

Originally Posted by bellsbendboy

BTW I read sometime back where you posted that Pat Day was NOT a great rider! With that said, no need to apologize for insulting me.

BSpencer: I cannot comment on your grasp of horizontal wagering and can only offer my own opinion. Although Ketchikan was the only horse I could have played in that leg, he did not have to win. I was much more confident in the other legs admittedly because of spreading. Most pick 4 players and almost all pick six players outspend their competition as their edge; my approach is to out handicap them. Empirically, singling the favorite will clear the race some thirty percent of the time, and taking the top two selections some fifty percent.

Stud: From a previous post where you listed the turf rail placements at your track I assume your "meet" is Calder. I certainly agree if you do not have a winning ticket in your "first" $24 the law of diminishing returns kicks in. Your tenets make sense and all 'cappers have them. I select a day to play, and play regardless of conviction. In fact probably playing FG Tuesday which would be the first Tuesday play since election day last year. Among my favorite tenets would be to look for a solid favorite to single! Perhaps some 70 percent of races are decided at the time of entry and the multi-race player can capitalize here. Also a change in the turf rail can make a horse highly unlikely even if they look very solid on paper. I also will spread or single in any leg.
Lastly I as well have a thick skin and do not rue tough beats very long. BBB

You seem to have a bit of interest, so I'll respond and give you a few insights but it'll be my last response to you as your tone is too condescending, your insults are too veiled and your compliments are far too backhanded for my taste.

1. Turf Rail Placement. I've heard people give anecdotal opinions for years and years, generally that the further out the rail, the kinder to speed. It's overrated at the least, and plain wrong, at least on 7/8 courses for non-chute 2-turn races based on my 4-year review. The further out the rail, the closer to the first turn and - across all classes - the faster the pace. There is a very, very modest correlation to rail placement and speed kindness for chute and sprint races but it's so small I think it's meaningless to be honest. Maybe FG or CD is different from where I play, but I'd be surprised.

2. Diminishing Returns after the "first" $24. Wrong imo. It depends on the way the races set up. If you 'shoehorn' yourself like this and never adapt to take advantage of how you perceive the races set up, good luck to you, as I think you will surely need it.

3. If you choose to play a p-4 on a certain day and do so regardless of conviction using just a short ticket strategy, good luck. By any definition of the phrase, you are playing on the most recreational basis possible, That's ok, but you cannot expect to be taken seriously.

4. Don't read too much into my fondness of short tickets. I played 125 days of Calder last year. Two p-4's a day. I played 80 of them. Of the 80 I played, 25 were short tickets.

5. I suppose I'm happy for you and "everyone" else at your other "forum" who all had that $25 winner. All I can say with conviction is that if everyone at Derby Trail had the same horse, it would not have paid $25.

Good luck.

[blackthroatedwind]

I agree with your last post ( probably all of it ) but specifically about the ticket sizes. I wasn't trying to say you can never hit Pick-4s with small tickets, and obviously like you I try to play the one or two offered at whatever track I'm playing, so certainly I sometimes play in the $24-$36 range ( and have even miraculously hit a few of these ). I was just trying to say that LIMITING yourself to that size can't work over time. I guess it feels like we agree.

STS, early this year, around the opening of Gulfstream, longtime handicapper and writer, Dick Powell wrote a column that had a great deal to say about rail placement. This was rail placement particular to Gulfstream. He had kept records throughout last year's meet, and maybe prior, as well. I'm not sure.

Anyway, if I recall correctly, he indicated that the rail, when placed at 0-12 feet out would favor inside speed horses. When the rail was set outward at 82-84 feet, this was a time when horses racing wide and closing were more favorable.

I found it all interesting and helpful. www.TSN may still have a copy of his column.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by Grits

STS, early this year, around the opening of Gulfstream, longtime handicapper and writer, Dick Powell wrote a column that had a great deal to say about rail placement. This was rail placement particular to Gulfstream. He had kept records throughout last year's meet, and maybe prior, as well. I'm not sure.

Anyway, if I recall correctly, he indicated that the rail, when placed at 0-12 feet out would favor inside speed horses. When the rail was set outward at 82-84 feet, this was a time when horses racing wide and closing were more favorable.

I found it all interesting and helpful. www.TSN may still have a copy of his column.

I believe that that is how Steve explained it to me at Gulfstream as well. It makes sense, when the rail is at 0 feet, the turns are tighter and your speed is going to hang on better. When it is out further, your turns are less tight and will give a more fair chance to closers and mid-pack runners.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by bellsbendboy

BSpencer: I cannot comment on your grasp of horizontal wagering and can only offer my own opinion. Although Ketchikan was the only horse I could have played in that leg, he did not have to win. I was much more confident in the other legs admittedly because of spreading. Most pick 4 players and almost all pick six players outspend their competition as their edge; my approach is to out handicap them. Empirically, singling the favorite will clear the race some thirty percent of the time, and taking the top two selections some fifty percent.

Obviously using two or more horses in a race in all likelihood will give one a better chance of surviving a leg, but most certainly any single is the strongest individual horse opinion a player has, otherwise it's tough to defend the play.

You won't " out handicap " them. It's a cute concept, but an immature one, and sadly they will probably " out handicap " and out spend you. Your competition is not nearly as weak as you may presume. The sooner a player figures out he's not trying to prove anything, and realizes playing the game is about making money, the sooner he will have a chance to actually achieve the right goal.

[SentToStud]

Originally Posted by Grits

STS, early this year, around the opening of Gulfstream, longtime handicapper and writer, Dick Powell wrote a column that had a great deal to say about rail placement. This was rail placement particular to Gulfstream. He had kept records throughout last year's meet, and maybe prior, as well. I'm not sure.

Anyway, if I recall correctly, he indicated that the rail, when placed at 0-12 feet out would favor inside speed horses. When the rail was set outward at 82-84 feet, this was a time when horses racing wide and closing were more favorable.

I found it all interesting and helpful. www.TSN may still have a copy of his column.

Thanks, Grits.

Someone told me about his article and I'll try to read it sometime. I'd be surprised a bit I guess, but not overly so if what you mentioned is the case. To be honest, I love the racing at Gulfstream but not wagering there. I bet $10-$25 a race at Gulf 2-3 days a week. Hopefully, my money at Gulf is slightly less "Dead" than average, so I'm donating $1-$2 a race. I can live with that as a fair price for seeing good racing in great weather. In any event, I'm far from being any kind of expert at Gulfstream.

A couple things...

Most important, there is a world of difference between grass racing on a 1-mile course vs a 7/8 with a chute. As far as rail placement on a 1-mile course, I agree wider turns hurt speed but I also believe the rail-out shorter run to the first turn hurts off-pace horses as well trip-wise. Personally, I think in these shorter 2-turn races, speed plays more poorly in rail-out races due to the increased pace that occurs as jockeys try to get over before the turn comes up. To me, intuitively, this all ads up to trip as a bigger factor in shorter 2-turn grace races, but that's true anyways, imo.

On a 7/8 course, the dynamic of greater value is post in chute races as well as run to the first turn combined with running style. I looked at several hundred Calder turf races over four years and found very few meaningful results based solely on rail placement. Here's a few things. My guess is that other 7/8 courses with chutes would share the same results but I'm not sure:
1. Inside post is incredibly important in chute races, more so with rail-out.
2. Rail out is good for speed at 5F. But it's a small sample.
3. Rail out is bad for speed at 7.5F (shortest 2-turn distance)

But none of this is very surprising since these are the prevailing trends at these distances.

F = Front = Within 1 length of lead at the two main points of call
P = Press = Within from 1.25 to 5 lengths at both points
C = Close = Other

Here are the overall win %s by running style/distance:
Sprint: F= 38% P= 48% C= 14%
Chute: F= 17% P= 41% C= 42%
7.5 F (Straight): F= 12% P= 35% C= 53%

This is all limited-use information aside from having some sense of what kind of running style and post position benefits horses at different distances on a 7/8 track. But when you play a track with few shippers, I think it's very useful, especially when horses change distances and posts.

As always, trip and pace are the biggest factors when I look at betting any grass race. Rail placement is way down on my list.

Good luck.

Thank you so much for elaborating more, STS. A great post.

I may be more acquainted than most of you with bellsbendoy (BBB), with whom I have corresponded occasionally the last three years or so. BBB does not need me to speak up for him, but here are my two cents worth anyway.

All I want to say is, when BBB says that his approach is to "out handicap them," don't assume he can't do it. He has posted with some regularity on the Fair Grounds / Starting Gate forum at www.nola.com the last several years and he is far, far ahead on his occasional Pick 4 plays, which rarely exceed $36 and are often $24 or less.

BBB posted a Pick 4 on our forum that paid around ten grand -- it was at Keeneland, if I recall correctly -- which by itself would have him way ahead. But even if you disregarded that monster payoff, BBB would still be an overall winner, and easily so, with his other posted scores. And BBB doesn't just post numbers, as some do: He generally provides a succinct analysis that sets forth the rationale for his selections.

I agree with you guys to the extent that you may be saying that BBB would win more money if he would bet more often and cover more combinations; he frequently hits 3 out of 4 and would likely have cashed many of these tickets if he'd gone a little deeper or had played multiple tickets. But I am not one to argue with the methods of a highly successful horseplayer, and based on my observations, BBB is one.