Final Verdict ... Fog Is A Fraud

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Pointg5

He still ran a 0 on Thorograph, more than once and at Oaklawn, going into the Derby, his Thoro's were as good or better than many...

Just further confirming the lack of value of the Thorographs.

[JJP]

Lawyer Ron was overrated by some, but not by many who never considered him a viable Triple Crown horse. He could be a very good sprinter, however, and I don't think its a lock that LITF would drill him at 6f. Actually I'd like to see them both in a 6f race and I think LR would be better value than LITF.

[kentuckyrosesinmay]

Originally Posted by JJP

Lawyer Ron was overrated by some, but not by many who never considered him a viable Triple Crown horse. He could be a very good sprinter, however, and I don't think its a lock that LITF would drill him at 6f. Actually I'd like to see them both in a 6f race and I think LR would be better value than LITF.

Well, that's not what just about everyone on this message board said. Just about everyone said that LR was overrated/overhyped. I'll pull the thread back up this evening so you can read it.

[ArlJim78]

This is an update on a post I made last night. I had stated that using the Bris pace and speed analysis it is easy to see the actual facts about LITF’s performances. I contacted the people at Bris and they were kind enough to give me the numbers for LITF in the Smile, so it helps to complete the picture.

The line consists of four numbers defined below:
E1-pace figure to the quarter
E2-pace figure to the half
LP-pace figure from the half to the end
SPD-final speed figure

This is a composite or average of all of LITF’s races. It shows his typical pace distribution early and late and total.
E1 E2 LP SPD
95 107 92 102

Here are the lines from his last five races.
E1 E2 LP SPD Finish race
93 111 79 95 eighth Smile sprint
88 103 102 107 first Aristides
101 110 81 96 second Golden Gate sprint (four horse field)
100 115 82 100 seventh BC - Sprint
94 103 105 109 first Bay Meadows Speed – five horse field

Notice that when he runs an E2 pace figure that is higher than his average, his late pace and final time suffer. Not coincidentally these all occurred in big G1 events or when there is a horse that is faster to the half than he is which is the case in the Golden Gate sprint (Carthage).

In the other races notice that his E1 and E2 pace were well within his target range and he was therefore able to come home strong and win. It is a textbook case of a horse being overmatched. His numbers in the Smile are remarkably similar to the BC sprint. If anything they were just slightly worse.

So Rupert this is why I claim that he IS consistent because when he has things his way you can pretty much predict the outcome and also when he is facing faster horses you can also predict the outcome because his three loses have remarkably similar late pace numbers. They weren't horrible but you can definetely see where he has maxed out.

For the record I’m not a shill for Bris but it is something that I use and find invaluable in deciphering the actual shape of the race.

I have offered what I think is a solid, logical argument to explain his performances. On the other hand people come back with such statements as “he didn’t fire”, “he didn’t try”, “he is not himself”, “he is sore”, “he is tired”. I have to tell you I think the guy is firing and is trying; he’s running his balls off. He is just in too deep.

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

This is an update on a post I made last night. I had stated that using the Bris pace and speed analysis it is easy to see the actual facts about LITF’s performances. I contacted the people at Bris and they were kind enough to give me the numbers for LITF in the Smile, so it helps to complete the picture.

The line consists of four numbers defined below:
E1-pace figure to the quarter
E2-pace figure to the half
LP-pace figure from the half to the end
SPD-final speed figure

This is a composite or average of all of LITF’s races. It shows his typical pace distribution early and late and total.
E1 E2 LP SPD
95 107 92 102

Here are the lines from his last five races.
E1 E2 LP SPD Finish race
93 111 79 95 eighth Smile sprint
88 103 102 107 first Aristides
101 110 81 96 second Golden Gate sprint (four horse field)
100 115 82 100 seventh BC - Sprint
94 103 105 109 first Bay Meadows Speed – five horse field

Notice that when he runs an E2 pace figure that is higher than his average, his late pace and final time suffer. Not coincidentally these all occurred in big G1 events or when there is a horse that is faster to the half than he is which is the case in the Golden Gate sprint (Carthage).

In the other races notice that his E1 and E2 pace were well within his target range and he was therefore able to come home strong and win. It is a textbook case of a horse being overmatched. His numbers in the Smile are remarkably similar to the BC sprint. If anything they were just slightly worse.

So Rupert this is why I claim that he IS consistent because when he has things his way you can pretty much predict the outcome and also when he is facing faster horses you can also predict the outcome because his three loses have remarkably similar late pace numbers. They weren't horrible but you can definetely see where he has maxed out.

For the record I’m not a shill for Bris but it is something that I use and find invaluable in deciphering the actual shape of the race.

I have offered what I think is a solid, logical argument to explain his performances. On the other hand people come back with such statements as “he didn’t fire”, “he didn’t try”, “he is not himself”, “he is sore”, “he is tired”. I have to tell you I think the guy is firing and is trying; he’s running his balls off. He is just in too deep.

This is excellent work and it goes along with everything we have been saying. Why are people so desperate for this horse to be anything but what he is?

I, too, want a solid concrete argument from someone that claims this horse wasnt vastly overrated.

Okay, for the final time, Name one grade 1 or 2 stake sprint that you are confident that LITF could win. Just one. And if you cant name one- he is overrated in regards to the hype and billing that he receives. It really is that simple.

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

Here are the lines from his last five races.
E1 E2 LP SPD Finish race
93 111 79 95 eighth Smile sprint
88 103 102 107 first Aristides
101 110 81 96 second Golden Gate sprint (four horse field)
100 115 82 100 seventh BC - Sprint
94 103 105 109 first Bay Meadows Speed – five horse field

I have offered what I think is a solid, logical argument to explain his performances. On the other hand people come back with such statements as “he didn’t fire”, “he didn’t try”, “he is not himself”, “he is sore”, “he is tired”. I have to tell you I think the guy is firing and is trying; he’s running his balls off. He is just in too deep.

Very pertinent and revealing information ... thanks, Jim.

As I have said .. it isn't the horse who is a fraud ... it's the wild overrating on the part of those who were unduly impressed by a winning streak achieved over less-than-mediocre rivals.

Lost In The Fog is to be applauded for his ability to ship well and to hold his form well over a long stretch of time and many different racing surfaces.

But he simply isn't fast enough or strong enough to win against good G1/G2 sprinters ... much less really good ones. He'd better not be around this Fall ... when Too Much Bling, Songster, Henny Hughes, Keyed Entry and the rest of this year's bumper 3YO crop ... mature into first-rate all-age sprinters.

Retirement is best course for Foggy

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

This is an update on a post I made last night. I had stated that using the Bris pace and speed analysis it is easy to see the actual facts about LITF’s performances. I contacted the people at Bris and they were kind enough to give me the numbers for LITF in the Smile, so it helps to complete the picture.

The line consists of four numbers defined below:
E1-pace figure to the quarter
E2-pace figure to the half
LP-pace figure from the half to the end
SPD-final speed figure

This is a composite or average of all of LITF’s races. It shows his typical pace distribution early and late and total.
E1 E2 LP SPD
95 107 92 102

Here are the lines from his last five races.
E1 E2 LP SPD Finish race
93 111 79 95 eighth Smile sprint
88 103 102 107 first Aristides
101 110 81 96 second Golden Gate sprint (four horse field)
100 115 82 100 seventh BC - Sprint
94 103 105 109 first Bay Meadows Speed – five horse field

Notice that when he runs an E2 pace figure that is higher than his average, his late pace and final time suffer. Not coincidentally these all occurred in big G1 events or when there is a horse that is faster to the half than he is which is the case in the Golden Gate sprint (Carthage).

In the other races notice that his E1 and E2 pace were well within his target range and he was therefore able to come home strong and win. It is a textbook case of a horse being overmatched. His numbers in the Smile are remarkably similar to the BC sprint. If anything they were just slightly worse.

So Rupert this is why I claim that he IS consistent because when he has things his way you can pretty much predict the outcome and also when he is facing faster horses you can also predict the outcome because his three loses have remarkably similar late pace numbers. They weren't horrible but you can definetely see where he has maxed out.

For the record I’m not a shill for Bris but it is something that I use and find invaluable in deciphering the actual shape of the race.

I have offered what I think is a solid, logical argument to explain his performances. On the other hand people come back with such statements as “he didn’t fire”, “he didn’t try”, “he is not himself”, “he is sore”, “he is tired”. I have to tell you I think the guy is firing and is trying; he’s running his balls off. He is just in too deep.

I know nothing about Bris pace figures, but are you going to tell me that they are extremely reliable? Do you make money bettting the horses overall by using those figures? Do you usually show a profit at the end of the year by relying on those pace figures? If those figures are so reliable, then how many winning years in a row have you had betting the horses?
Do you understand my point? Here is an anology. Let's say that a guy likes to bet football and he loves the Jets this weekend. The Jets lose. He also loves the Rams this weekend. The Rams lose. The third game he loves is the Eagles. The Eagles win, so he won 1 out of 3 games. He says after the game, "I knew the Eagles would win." In reality he didn't know the Eagles would win. He may have thought they would win but he also thought the Jets and Rams would win. If he's not a winning player overall, then I think it's silly for him to say I knew this team would win for these reasons. He didn't know the team would win. He was just as positive that the Rams would win and he was totally wrong. I think the same could be said about those pace figures. The figures said that LITF would lose those races and he lost. That doesn't prove those figures are reliable any more so than the Eagles winning proves that my football guy is reliable at picking winners.
If you make a profit every year betting the horses by using those Bris figures, then they are probably pretty reliable. If not, then they are like anything else that works once in a while. A guy can say that he knew such and such a horse would win because the horse had the highest Beyer number. What about the other 8 races where the horse with the highest Beyer number lost.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Bold Brooklynite

Very pertinent and revealing information ... thanks, Jim.

As I have said .. it isn't the horse who is a fraud ... it's the wild overrating on the part of those who were unduly impressed by a winning streak achieved over less-than-mediocre rivals.

Lost In The Fog is to be applauded for his ability to ship well and to hold his form well over a long stretch of time and many different racing surfaces.

But he simply isn't fast enough or strong enough to win against good G1/G2 sprinters ... much less really good ones. He'd better not be around this Fall ... when Too Much Bling, Songster, Henny Hughes, Keyed Entry and the rest of this year's bumper 3YO crop ... mature into first-rate all-age sprinters.

Retirement is best course for Foggy

I'm surprised you are so high on Henny Hughes. According to the logic that you guys use, I would have thought that you would think his last race was not that impressive because he didn't beat anyone. I think HH's last race was awesome.

[blackthroatedwind]

As far as your question about whether or not someone has made money using BRIS figures ( personally I do NOT advocate computer generated numbers but to each his own ), I understand your point, but I will say that I don't know one successful horseplayer ( and I know many ) who believed the hype last year about Lost in the Fog. In fact, of the successful players I know, I actually ( mistakenly ) liked him more than any of them. I am also a successful horseplayer. I have made money in 14 of the previous 16 years and am well on my way to another successful year. So, if you want to equate successful horseplaying to validity on opinions about LITF, I would say the recent post by Bold Brooklynite pretty much hits the nail on the head. He is a very talented horse but neither as good as his popular reputation nor as good as the top sprinters annually.

Did he run his best race this past weekend? Probably not. But, I would say it is a fairer estimation of his true relative ability, as was his BC performance, than the estimation he seemed to earn while valiantly beating up on vastly inferior competition. Nobody seems to be saying he's a bum. He's hardly that. But, without a very favorable pace scenerio, he is unlikely to be able to handle the top ten sprinters in the country.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

As far as your question about whether or not someone has made money using BRIS figures ( personally I do NOT advocate computer generated numbers but to each his own ), I understand your point, but I will say that I don't know one successful horseplayer ( and I know many ) who believed the hype last year about Lost in the Fog. In fact, of the successful players I know, I actually ( mistakenly ) liked him more than any of them. I am also a successful horseplayer. I have made money in 14 of the previous 16 years and am well on my way to another successful year. So, if you want to equate successful horseplaying to validity on opinions about LITF, I would say the recent post by Bold Brooklynite pretty much hits the nail on the head. He is a very talented horse but neither as good as his popular reputation nor as good as the top sprinters annually.

Did he run his best race this past weekend? Probably not. But, I would say it is a fairer estimation of his true relative ability, as was his BC performance, than the estimation he seemed to earn while valiantly beating up on vastly inferior competition. Nobody seems to be saying he's a bum. He's hardly that. But, without a very favorable pace scenerio, he is unlikely to be able to handle the top ten sprinters in the country.

I never said that LITF was an all-time great. What he did last year was pretty amazing but I'm still not going to say that he's an all-time great. I am saying that I think he was the best sprinter in the country last year and he definitely deserved the Eclipse Award. Who else was there? Who do you think the best sprinter was last year? I don't know how could say Silver Train. Silver Train repeatedly lost to worse 3 year olds than the ones that LITF consistently beat. Do you think that Taste of Paradise was the best sprinter? He only won one race all year.
By the way, when LITF went :43 1/5 and ran in 6 furlongs in 1:07 1/5, I know it was at Golden Gate. But still, who could have beaten him that day? If Taste of Paradise went up there for that race, do you think he would have run 1:07 and won the race. I don't think so.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I am saying that I think he was the best sprinter in the country last year and he definitely deserved the Eclipse Award. Who else was there?

I do believe that he was deserving of the Eclipse Award as he absolutely accomplished more in that category than any other horse. He was NOT, however, the best sprinter in the country.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

Pupkin is the king of this.

That's not true. I bet if you check every single post I have made on this board since its inception, you won't find a single post where I boasted or "trotted my resume". I did it in this thread but that was in response to someone telling me that I don't have any expertise in watching a race. If a guy cites his credentials once a year and it's only when his credibility is questioned, I don't know how you could categorize that as being the king of trotting my resume.
I remember once when you were talking about sports, someone said that you probably don't even play sports. You responded by telling them that you are a good baseball player and had played at many different levels. That's not boasting or trotting your resume. That is simply defending yourself to someone whose assessment of you was incorrect.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

I do believe that he was deserving of the Eclipse Award as he absolutely accomplished more in that category than any other horse. He was NOT, however, the best sprinter in the country.

If LITF was not the best sprinter last year, then who was?
I don't know how you can say that your friends' assessment of LITF was better than yours. Why would you think that? The fact that he lost one race at the end of a hard campaign doesn't prove anything. I'll bet that these same friends were constantly betting against him and were constantly wrong. Then when he finally lost, they probably said I told you so.
And this year, the horse has had excuses. I don't think you can hold it against him too much that he lost his first race off the layoff. His race in Kentucky was huge. That was an awesome race. I'm not that big on figures but I'll bet that all the figures confirm that he ran a huge race that day. I know he ran a 111 Beyer. I don't know what his sheet number was but I bet it is was a huge number. Kelly's Landing is a very good sprinter when he fires. On his best day, he can compete with anyone. He ran huge that day and LITF still beat him.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

That's not true. I bet if you check every single post I have made on this board since its inception, you won't find a single post where I boasted or "trotted my resume". I did it in this thread but that was in response to someone telling me that I don't have any expertise in watching a race. If a guy cites his credentials once a year and it's only when his credibility is questioned, I don't know how you could categorize that as being the king of trotting my resume.
I remember once when you were talking about sports, someone said that you probably don't even play sports. You responded by telling them that you are a good baseball player and had played at many different levels. That's not boasting or trotting your resume. That is simply defending yourself to someone whose assessment of you was incorrect.

i have read a lot of posts both here and elsewhere from rupert/richi, and this is the first time i ever saw his 'resume' for what it's worth.


as for something else i read on here, yes, LITF did deserve the eclipse last year. and much like other horses who have won eclipses, he may not have been the BEST--but he was the one out there winning graded stakes all year, unlike bc sprint winner silver train for instance.
as for him being overrated by the bettors, that happens all the time. a lot of horses get bet down due to name recognition alone. 'that horse was in the derby, bet him' for example. then of course you have bettors who go with the trainer, or the jock....regardless of the abilities of the horse involved. or those who go by what a horse did last year. we all know ability at two doesn't always show at three.

however, i don't think people who have said they were a litf fan should get an eight page bashing from those who 'saw thru him'. nothing at all wrong with being supportive of a horse, altho i think there's a LOT wrong with people coming here after a horse loses and screaming you knew it all along....no one really knows what kind of horse a horse is, til he's done running. until then, anyone who chooses any horse is going out on a limb. after all, we all know it's a lot harder to pick a winner in a big field, than to pick a loser. the odds are ALWAYS in favor of those in the second group!

as for fogs future, i'd like to see him try the turf. he's got the pedigree.

i do think it's a shame that FOG is getting so much grief tho. last year he shipped all over and won all over, while many hot house horses didn't run as many times as i have fingers on one hand.

[blackthroatedwind]

I completely disagree.

First of all, my friends who properly evaluated him were NOT betting against him in the weak fields he faced, as it's all about relative ability.

Secondly, he didn't just fail the ONLY time he met even a reasonably tough field, he was drowned.

As for this year, he lost in essentially a match race in his return this year, as the third and fourth finishers in that four horse field are not even competitive in 25 claimers. Hardly an excusable loss for the supposed best sprinter in the country.

As for his Churchill race, it was a decent performance at best, as all he did was stalk a very slow pace set by an overmatched horse and hold off an established mediocrity ( one who failed after having the race wrapped up in his previous start to the aforementioned overmatched mediocrity ). He did what he had to do, which is his greatest quality, but it was simply nothing close to a " huge " effort.

And, let me go back to your opening paragraph and your comments about the people I know. These people are some of the most recognized names in handicapping in the game and, believe me, I have talked racing with them for years and respect their opinions greatly. I am not somebody who is even close to assuming someone is sharp because they write for a paper....I know these individuals are sharp because I have seen their results over many years. They are hardly the " I told you so " kind of people.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

I completely disagree.

First of all, my friends who properly evaluated him were NOT betting against him in the weak fields he faced, as it's all about relative ability.

Secondly, he didn't just fail the ONLY time he met even a reasonably tough field, he was drowned.

As for this year, he lost in essentially a match race in his return this year, as the third and fourth finishers in that four horse field are not even competitive in 25 claimers. Hardly an excusable loss for the supposed best sprinter in the country.

As for his Churchill race, it was a decent performance at best, as all he did was stalk a very slow pace set by an overmatched horse and hold off an established mediocrity ( one who failed after having the race wrapped up in his previous start to the aforementioned overmatched mediocrity ). He did what he had to do, which is his greatest quality, but it was simply nothing close to a " huge " effort.

And, let me go back to your opening paragraph and your comments about the people I know. These people are some of the most recognized names in handicapping in the game and, believe me, I have talked racing with them for years and respect their opinions greatly. I am not somebody who is even close to assuming someone is sharp because they write for a paper....I know these individuals are sharp because I have seen their results over many years. They are hardly the " I told you so " kind of people.

Alright, fair enough. If your friends liked him to win every one of those races except for the BC Sprint, then they called it right.

[kentuckyrosesinmay]

Originally Posted by Pointg5

I don't know if I would call Lawyer Ron slow, he did run a 0 on Thorograph and ran a Beyer at 106 or 107, that's not exactly slow and those numbers were comparable with the other Top 3yo's before the Triple Crown races. I really liked this horse and still do, the thing I didn't want to admit before the Kentucky Derby was that he was over the top with all of that racing, he had to go backwards at some point without taking a break, that was my error in judgement. I think the jury is still very much out on him, he may never be able to improve after his injury, but I certainly would not say he is slow, and if he comes back, he could improve. With that said, I do not think he's as talented as Bernardini or Jazil, but he could certainly hold his own against a Blue Grass Cat or Sunriver....

I think that he is at about the same level of talent as Jazil and Bluegrass Cat, and is better than Sunriver or Steppenwolfer. I don't think he would have ever beaten the top horses such as Barbaro or Bernardini, but he is a neat little horse who I think is more than capable of running in Grade II company which is most likely what BC, Jazil, Sunriver, and Stepp will be running in by the end of the year. I don't see any of these horses besides Bernardini going on to be true Grade I horses. Not with FA, Invasor, and some other three year olds that will now start to step up to the plate.

[kentuckyrosesinmay]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Steppenwolfer is a plodding mediocrity. Telling me where horses finished in races doesn't fool me into thinking they are particularly talented. Perhaps, and seemingly, you are fooled by this. You shouldn't be.

Lawyer Ron was the most overrated horse on the TC trail. I kind of like him, he's a neat horse, but he's not supremely talented. It isn't a criticism...it is reality.

I consider both Steppenwolfer and Lawyer Ron to be more than a "plodding mediocrity" in the grand scheme of things. Lawyer Ron isn't the most talented horse there is...I will admit that. However, he is, like you said, a neat horse and if he comes back into form from his injuries then I see him as being a solid Grade II animal which will be very good considering the depth of talent in this crop he is in. Also, I believe that had the circumstances been different in the Derby that he would have finished in the top three. I thought he had one more race in him and was wrong. It was too late. Holthus had already done him in. I just wish I would have known about the chip before he went into the Derby.

[sham]

Lost In The Fog is a victim of his own reputation in some ways. Too much is expected from him. If one looks back over the last 25 years, you will see that the top sprinters lose often. It is so easy to lose a sprint race. All it takes is a bad break or even just a bad post position. I agree that LITF has not beat a quality field, and may never do so. He only has to do that once, and coupled with his other exploits, his career would be very satisfying. I feel sure he will be retired soon...again a victim of his own reputation because his connection fear his stud fee will suffer if they let him lose again. Assuming the horse is sound, I'd give him a short break, then bring him back in a couple easy prep races, maybe on his home track, then shoot for the moon in the BC sprint as his last race. Who knows, he might get lucky and go out on top.

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I know nothing about Bris pace figures, but are you going to tell me that they are extremely reliable? Do you make money bettting the horses overall by using those figures? Do you usually show a profit at the end of the year by relying on those pace figures? If those figures are so reliable, then how many winning years in a row have you had betting the horses?
Do you understand my point? Here is an anology. Let's say that a guy likes to bet football and he loves the Jets this weekend. The Jets lose. He also loves the Rams this weekend. The Rams lose. The third game he loves is the Eagles. The Eagles win, so he won 1 out of 3 games. He says after the game, "I knew the Eagles would win." In reality he didn't know the Eagles would win. He may have thought they would win but he also thought the Jets and Rams would win. If he's not a winning player overall, then I think it's silly for him to say I knew this team would win for these reasons. He didn't know the team would win. He was just as positive that the Rams would win and he was totally wrong. I think the same could be said about those pace figures. The figures said that LITF would lose those races and he lost. That doesn't prove those figures are reliable any more so than the Eagles winning proves that my football guy is reliable at picking winners.
If you make a profit every year betting the horses by using those Bris figures, then they are probably pretty reliable. If not, then they are like anything else that works once in a while. A guy can say that he knew such and such a horse would win because the horse had the highest Beyer number. What about the other 8 races where the horse with the highest Beyer number lost.

That’s it? All you have to offer are unrelated questions as to whether I show a yearly profit and analogies about betting football games? I’ve stayed right on topic offering you my take on LITF and backing it up completely with facts. You don’t even mention anything I’ve offered. You merely say that you don’t know anything about Bris numbers. Well you wouldn’t necessarily have had to because I explained everything I posted and it actually is rather hard to deny the patterns. I guess you’re still more comfortable with the vague “he didn’t fire” hypothesis for those races.

Yes the Bris numbers are very reliable. I have improved tremendously using them. Like I said they give you a view of the race that you cannot find elsewhere. I am not touting them as some kind of simple solution to picking winners. Like I said I also relied heavily on replays in order to come to an opinion about LITF’s true class. I use several tools when handicapping. The Bris numbers did not predict that LITF would lose. That was my conclusion after noticing the consistent pattern of his performances. By no means am I implying that these numbers lead me to easy winners and yearly profits, there is much more to it than just looking at numbers. In an earlier post you were trying to back up your assertion that LITF had as much early speed as any horse running by stating that he ran a 43.2 half mile and won by ten lengths at GG. If you want to talk about data that is unreliable, it’s hard to beat looking at raw times.

Also I’m not implying that having an opinion that a horse will not win has much value. However when the horse routinely goes off at odds between 2:5 and 1:1 there is a great chance to make a nice score if you play the rest of the race or races correctly, but that’s no gimme. You can still screw it up like I did in the big pick five last week. I had 4 of 5, of course not using LITF, but I relied too much on Dubai Escapade so I didn’t have the winning combo.