|
|
HANDICAPPING INSIGHTS FEBRUARY 10, 2006 by Dick Powell If I were grading Gulfstream Park's simulcast of "Spectacular Saturday," I would give them an "A." For awful. I was at a casino in Las Vegas on Saturday for the day with not one but two television monitors at my wagering carrel. The forecast of heavy rain before and during the races turned out to be true but I consider myself to be a superior wet-track handicapper, so I had Gulfstream tuned in on one of the monitors for the entire card. If you build a track in South Florida, you would think that the likelihood of rain and showers would be taken into account in its design. However, Gulfstream didn't. The $170 million renovation may have worked in Las Vegas or Dubai, but it wasn't practical last Saturday and won't be on any other day which receives the typical pop-up showers in South Florida The first problem on Saturday's card began, as usual, in Gulfstream's claustrophobic paddock and saddling area. The fountain was in full operation and it was very difficult to watch the horses before the race. There are no camera shots of saddling stalls and it is very hard to see a horse in its entirety while walking in the ring. If you are looking for first time front-leg bandages, you have to wait for them to come out on the track for the post parade. Even last year, when the horses saddled in temporary facilities, you could see more of the horses during the saddling process than you can now. Though we were told that the track was going to be listed as "sloppy," we never got to actually see the track until 10 minutes to post time. When the horses came out, we could finally see how wet it was and that it was sealed. I paid attention as hard as I could but was not able to see any shoe information. So, on a day with six stakes races, some having a meaningful impact for three-year-olds, it was very hard to get the information you need for wet-track handicapping. After the first race was run, more showers hit the area and now Gulfstream was not showing any paddock shots at all. Yes, it was raining but just about every track in North America, big and small, is able to televise the paddock proceedings regardless of the weather. As the day went on and the weather worsened, post parades were shortened so that we had even less time to see the horses. Inexplicably, Gulfstream would show the replays of the previous race and then nothing but a high camera shot across the track that shows the many condos being built in South Florida. Minutes would go by with the same camera shot. If you walked into a racebook and looked up and saw this scene frozen on the screen, you would have to assume that racing was canceled for the day or that there was a big delay going on. How, in the year 2006, with your new track opened for over a month, can you not have cameras -- either permanent or temporary -- throughout your facility that show the athletes who are participating before the race in a consistent and dependable manner? I have not been to the new Gulfstream Park, and when I do go, I may or may not like the new facility. They did an awesome job last year installing a new dirt course and a spectacular turf course, so all is not bad. However, simulcasting is a different animal, and first and foremost you need the input of off-track customers who watch and wager from remote sites. Years ago this would be unheard of, but in today's market where more than 80 percent of a track's wagering takes place away from the track, this information is critical. Every once in a while there would be shoe information displayed on the lower right hand of the screen. Not very visible, not very consistent as to when it appeared, and it only gave information on who was wearing bend shoes with nothing about mud caulks. There were many horses on Saturday trained by Nick Zito, Allen Jerkens and Michael Hushion -- all noted for using mud caulks on a regular basis. Yet, we had no information from the Gulfstream simulcast whether they were using mud caulks. In fact, the story gets worse. In the Equibase charts for Saturday, not a single horse raced with mud caulks. This is impossible to believe. The only explanation is that Gulfstream does not track this piece of critical handicapping information and only gives you information on bend shoes. An example of how shoe information should be handled can be found from the New York Racing Association (NYRA). They include it in their crawl across the bottom of the screen, they put up a graphic page with it while the horses are leaving the paddock, the track announcer announces it as the horses come out on the track, and horseplayers know where to find it. In the 3RD race, Zito sent out first-time starter PROTAGONUS (Salt Lake) in a six-furlong maiden sprint. Zito is only an 8 percent first out trainer, according to BRIS, but with a wet track and a speedy pedigree, the youngster appeared capable. Sometimes Zito sends out firsters without mud caulks and gives them an educational race, and then the next time he puts on the caulks and the horse is well meant. On Saturday, I had no idea what to do since we were not given that information. Protagonus was 6-1 as the fourth choice in the wagering, and I have always felt that Zito firsters can be played as long as the price is right. In a seven-horse field, the price was definitely right, but the X factor (shoe information) was not available and I took a pass. Jeremy Rose gave the colt a strong ride and blew by the favorite, Steel the Glory (Saint Ballado), in the stretch to win going away, completing a very generous exacta. It's one thing to not like a track's simulcast because of aesthetics, but to fail to have cameras properly positioned, and fail to provide critical information to your customers, is self-destructive. It certainly will have an impact on me the next time I decide what track to play if I know going in that key handicapping items might not be available. Speaking of Magna, and I am not a Frank Stronach basher by any means, can anyone explain Santa Anita's policy of displaying win, place and show prices when the race is official and then waiting five minutes to display the exotic payouts? I could possibly excuse it on the last race of the day with so many of the pools being dependent on the finale, but this happens race in and race out. A friend of mine hit an exacta, waited for more than five minutes, and then noticed that the racebook manager was hand-writing the payoffs on the result board. He walked up, saw the price, went back to his seat and the result was still not displayed on the Santa Anita simulcast screen. While this is annoying and also inexplicable with today's technology, it doesn't necessarily affect your betting process. The issues at Gulfstream are far more serious and egregious, and they need to be fixed immediately.
 Send this article to a friend
|
|
