The ratings performed averagely on a fairly low grade Tuesday.
The graded (4) and (5) races did a bit better with one top rated win, three 2nd top rated wins (two joint 2nd) and two losing races. Not too bad on a very low grade racing day.
Now, I am constantly asked if I use form figures, betting forecasts, trainer form etc., when compiling the handicaps. Absolutely not. On site I explain that except for certain types of horses (debutantes, horses with little form in the book and National Hunt horses switching codes) all the handicaps are based on a horse's overall form as seen in the form book. If you go HERE you will be able to see exactly how I assess every type of horse's form to give it a handicap mark.
I have seen many different types of ratings which perform well but are based on purely random factors such as points for form figures, points for the type of race previously run in, prize money contested in the past, trainer form, draw, betting forecast etc., etc.,. There is nothing wrong with such a way of rating horses. They can be effective in certain types of races. But when I see people awarding points for a Walk Over, and giving no points for a faller or an unseated rider, or a pulled up or for finishing out of the first three, four, five, or six, then I cringe.
I also see some systems (again, some effective ratings) produce multiple columns from which are claimed all manner of victories. Creating columns gives some the chance to claim winners because it was top or near the top of one of the columns. This is a misleading way to report results but it provides its creators with the chance to claim virtually any winner when the people who have used them never saw the winner coming because they were either concentrating on a particular column or had been confused because there were so many columns.. If people want to use such systems and they make a regular profit from them, then I congratulate them and tell them to continue on their path to profit.
But at TowerForm you get one rating only and the handicaps live an die by that single rating only. It would be easy for me to create new innovative columns with different figures in each column - and I could claim winners from any column I liked. But that would be wrong. All the winners I claim are from the top two rated horses including joints. All top rated winners are clear top rated unless the overnight top rated is a non runner. My claims for 2nd top winners are also appended with the words "including joints" if they are joint rated. There are never any more than two horses rated 2nd top.
No one should have the ability to misquote results by manipulating them. Unfortunately, many good, genuine services (and there are more than you think) are tainted by the shadow of suspicion because there are also services less than honest. Usually, you can spot these services straight out. But sometimes you find out after you've handed over your hard earned cash. I know. I was that punter in my formative years.
There is also the same suspicion when services offer free trials. Free trials have their critics who claim that, "Services only offer a free trial in the hope that a good run will convince people to pay a subscription when the trial is over. Inevitably, the results bottom out and money is lost. This is okay for the services because they have got a subscription payment from a random week or month of results."
I also offer free trials (on THIS page). So I can clearly be painted with the same brush. But I make the point that the free trials are simply for people to judge whether they can incorporate the services into their betting strategy. I do not look for a random winning run to entice a subscription out of a triallist.
I cannot offer free trials to get easy money because the services have had a good week. Good weeks, bad weeks, indifferent weeks can easily be seen from the results published. These results are cast iron in two ways. First, TowerForm subscribers are the ultimate arbiters. They see the results every day. Second, Brian Coplin of ukracinginfo kindly compiles the results for us. I have nothing to do with results compilation. I just check if the results are correct - and they have always been correct. So my free trials are not in the hope I hit a good run when a triallist is using the ratings. Past results are already available on site for prospective subscribers to view at their leisure.
So to reiterate: the free trials are simply for people to discover if they can use the ratings effectively. Nothing more.
To Wednesday: If you read the blog a couple of days ago, you will have my view of collateral form. But there is one piece of collateral form worth following. Dreams Jewel and So Brash were 2nd and 3rd in a good race at Wincanton ten days ago and run in consecutive races today. Both are restrictive prices, but if So Brash wins the 3-40 at Exeter, then Dreams Jewel will win the next race on the card.
Tuesday, 31 March 2009
Monday, 30 March 2009
All Weather Strikes Again
Just a very short blog today - been a bit of a hectic day.
The dutch bet for Monday that I wrote about yesterday, was successful: the 2nd top rated Dark Ranger winning at 6/1 with the clear top rated, Wunder Strike, having its chance ruined on the first and last bends in a race to be treated with suspicion, form-wise.
There were only three (4) and (5) graded races which all won - including the dutch mentioned above.
It was a forgettable day, quality-wise, Monday, but a couple of two-year-olds should be worth a good look next time. I particularly liked the way the winner, Leleyf battled late on to win near the line. Having that attitude will serve her well in the coming weeks. Also, Pattersea Girl and My Mandy showed enough after being left behind as the stalls opened. The former looked reluctant to follow the field as she crawled out of the stalls, so it may be wise to wait a run or two to see if that is a blip or a characteristic.
Overall, the ratings did well at the All Weather tracks with seven clear top rated winners and three joint second top rated winners from thirteen races (the top two through the card at Wolverhampton).
So a good day, overall.
Tuesday is almost as bad as Monday. Nothing to get excited about overnight - except for a dutch or two subscribers know about. Register HERE to get a full One Week Free Trial and monitor the (4) and (5) graded results.
I'll have much more tomorrow.
The dutch bet for Monday that I wrote about yesterday, was successful: the 2nd top rated Dark Ranger winning at 6/1 with the clear top rated, Wunder Strike, having its chance ruined on the first and last bends in a race to be treated with suspicion, form-wise.
There were only three (4) and (5) graded races which all won - including the dutch mentioned above.
It was a forgettable day, quality-wise, Monday, but a couple of two-year-olds should be worth a good look next time. I particularly liked the way the winner, Leleyf battled late on to win near the line. Having that attitude will serve her well in the coming weeks. Also, Pattersea Girl and My Mandy showed enough after being left behind as the stalls opened. The former looked reluctant to follow the field as she crawled out of the stalls, so it may be wise to wait a run or two to see if that is a blip or a characteristic.
Overall, the ratings did well at the All Weather tracks with seven clear top rated winners and three joint second top rated winners from thirteen races (the top two through the card at Wolverhampton).
So a good day, overall.
Tuesday is almost as bad as Monday. Nothing to get excited about overnight - except for a dutch or two subscribers know about. Register HERE to get a full One Week Free Trial and monitor the (4) and (5) graded results.
I'll have much more tomorrow.
What Price a Winner?
Palace Moon bolted up at 5/1 but I have to say a few things about the performance. It is usually not prudent to take a large margin win too literally early season - especially on Doncaster's straight course. The effect of the draw and many horses being a couple of beats below peak fitness can sometimes skewer the form book. Having said that, Palace Moon won with such authority that it is hard not to be impressed. He quickened in the blink of an eye and soon had the others toiling as he effortlessly drew clear. The downside is his handicap mark. He ran off 88 and will be punished by the handicapper - as he is always prone to do when he knows he's made a big mistake. A mark in the late 90s is the minimum he can expect when he is reassessed - if the handicapper is feeling generous, that is.
(By the way, Friday's bet, Be Brief was a non runner due to lameness.)
I have often been asked, "If there is one piece of advice you can give to help me find a winner, what would it be?"
My answer? Ignore the betting forecast in the daily's or the racing press - after, of course, you have subscribed to TowerForm Ratings.
To get a grip on how the newspapers and the racing press compile their forecasts just go to the overnight declarations Weatherby's send out HERE. The last column has the overnight forecast SP. The resultant forecast you see in the racing press is a compilers adjustment based on what he knows. Many daily's simply transpose these prices onto their racecards. Look at Monday's 2-30 at Lingfield on the Sporting Life's website HERE then have another look at Weatherby's. (Note: These links may not work come Tuesday.)
I am not belittling the forecast compilers, I am simply saying that if you read the form book with an eye on the betting forecast, you are likely to be influenced in your thoughts. You might think, "Oh, that's got a chance," then glance at the betting forecast and think, "Mmm." I.E. you've been influenced.
But to a small example: Last week two horses, A and B, met on level weights in a handicap. Horse A beat horse B by half a length. Today they meet again on the same track, over the same distance, on the same going, and the draw is similar for both horses. Horse B is now three pounds better off with horse A for that half length beating. In the form book you discover that horse B was slightly blocked in his run and finished fast, closing on the winner near the line. Also, the betting forecast has horse B at 6/4 and horse A at 11/4. As Aleksandr the meerkat says, "Simples! Tch!"
If only....
Looking at the form book and glancing at the betting forecast would cause you to think horse B will reverse form with horse A. So you decide to back horse B. The race comes round and you are left cursing the form book because horse A not only confirms the form, it extends the winning margin. You throw away the form book, run your finger blindly up and down the next day's racecard and say to the wife, "Tell me when to stop."
What you had done was be influenced by the market to the degree that you stopped reading form. When reading collateral form like that I ask myself a number of questions.
What if you had ignored the betting forecast? Well, you would probably have read a little more form and discovered that horse A was making its seasonal debut when it won and would therefore be fitter today; or, horse A idles when it hits the front; or, horse B regularly makes its own trouble and finishes well but doesn't win; or horse B always runs like it will win but when asked for the final effort to pass a horse it shirks. In such scenarios, horse A will always win in my estimation. But if I halted my form reading because I was distracted by the betting forecast, I would back horse B.
But forecast monitoring is not only restricted to such as the above example. I always hear people say about National Hunt winners, "How can that win. It pulled up last time behind today's favourite." Well, if we all thought that way we'd never back a winner - especially over the jumps. We all know that every horse can be excused a bad run, and on the NH it can be excused two or more.
On the Flat it is straightforward. It either had an off day or the going went against it, et al. Over the jumps, it may not be so straightforward. Try jumping over a small bush and scraping it with your leg, or even knocking it on one of the bush's twigs and you'll begin to get my drift. Horses jumping fences can knock, scrape, cut, or bruise limbs simply by jumping a fence. All it takes is one slight mistake or another horse crowding it or bumping it as it jumps, and its race can be over. So, don't automatically assume a horse that pulls up maybe twice on the trot is useless and not worth considering. I have many times handicapped a horse to be top rated after it has pulled up twice. Kempski is a recent example. He had pulled up four times in his previous six starts (including his last two runs) when I clear top rated him. He won by half a length at 9/2 in a five runner field. So don't immediately discard horses with the form figures "P or PP" by their names. You'll be missing winners regularly.
To Monday, or not if you don't mind. Nothing looks a definite bet overnight - except for a dutch my subscribers are privvy to.
Worst Joke of the Day
A snail went into a pub and the barman said, "Sorry, but we have a strict 'No Snails' policy." He picked up the snail and kicked him out of the pub.
A year later the snail returned to the pub and asked the barman, "Why did you do that?"
And its "Goodnight from him."
(By the way, Friday's bet, Be Brief was a non runner due to lameness.)
I have often been asked, "If there is one piece of advice you can give to help me find a winner, what would it be?"
My answer? Ignore the betting forecast in the daily's or the racing press - after, of course, you have subscribed to TowerForm Ratings.
To get a grip on how the newspapers and the racing press compile their forecasts just go to the overnight declarations Weatherby's send out HERE. The last column has the overnight forecast SP. The resultant forecast you see in the racing press is a compilers adjustment based on what he knows. Many daily's simply transpose these prices onto their racecards. Look at Monday's 2-30 at Lingfield on the Sporting Life's website HERE then have another look at Weatherby's. (Note: These links may not work come Tuesday.)
I am not belittling the forecast compilers, I am simply saying that if you read the form book with an eye on the betting forecast, you are likely to be influenced in your thoughts. You might think, "Oh, that's got a chance," then glance at the betting forecast and think, "Mmm." I.E. you've been influenced.
But to a small example: Last week two horses, A and B, met on level weights in a handicap. Horse A beat horse B by half a length. Today they meet again on the same track, over the same distance, on the same going, and the draw is similar for both horses. Horse B is now three pounds better off with horse A for that half length beating. In the form book you discover that horse B was slightly blocked in his run and finished fast, closing on the winner near the line. Also, the betting forecast has horse B at 6/4 and horse A at 11/4. As Aleksandr the meerkat says, "Simples! Tch!"
If only....
Looking at the form book and glancing at the betting forecast would cause you to think horse B will reverse form with horse A. So you decide to back horse B. The race comes round and you are left cursing the form book because horse A not only confirms the form, it extends the winning margin. You throw away the form book, run your finger blindly up and down the next day's racecard and say to the wife, "Tell me when to stop."
What you had done was be influenced by the market to the degree that you stopped reading form. When reading collateral form like that I ask myself a number of questions.
- How was the race run.
- Was there any pace in the race.
- What is the overall style of running horse A and B have.
- Was horse A or horse B fitter from previous runs.
What if you had ignored the betting forecast? Well, you would probably have read a little more form and discovered that horse A was making its seasonal debut when it won and would therefore be fitter today; or, horse A idles when it hits the front; or, horse B regularly makes its own trouble and finishes well but doesn't win; or horse B always runs like it will win but when asked for the final effort to pass a horse it shirks. In such scenarios, horse A will always win in my estimation. But if I halted my form reading because I was distracted by the betting forecast, I would back horse B.
But forecast monitoring is not only restricted to such as the above example. I always hear people say about National Hunt winners, "How can that win. It pulled up last time behind today's favourite." Well, if we all thought that way we'd never back a winner - especially over the jumps. We all know that every horse can be excused a bad run, and on the NH it can be excused two or more.
On the Flat it is straightforward. It either had an off day or the going went against it, et al. Over the jumps, it may not be so straightforward. Try jumping over a small bush and scraping it with your leg, or even knocking it on one of the bush's twigs and you'll begin to get my drift. Horses jumping fences can knock, scrape, cut, or bruise limbs simply by jumping a fence. All it takes is one slight mistake or another horse crowding it or bumping it as it jumps, and its race can be over. So, don't automatically assume a horse that pulls up maybe twice on the trot is useless and not worth considering. I have many times handicapped a horse to be top rated after it has pulled up twice. Kempski is a recent example. He had pulled up four times in his previous six starts (including his last two runs) when I clear top rated him. He won by half a length at 9/2 in a five runner field. So don't immediately discard horses with the form figures "P or PP" by their names. You'll be missing winners regularly.
To Monday, or not if you don't mind. Nothing looks a definite bet overnight - except for a dutch my subscribers are privvy to.
Worst Joke of the Day
A snail went into a pub and the barman said, "Sorry, but we have a strict 'No Snails' policy." He picked up the snail and kicked him out of the pub.
A year later the snail returned to the pub and asked the barman, "Why did you do that?"
And its "Goodnight from him."
Saturday, 28 March 2009
The Moon is Up
Expresso Star delivered in the Lincoln and will probably be raised back up in distance next time rather than take in the Newbury Spring Cup on his way to Listed racing.
Flipando ran a superb race in third but may similarly suffer at the hands of the handicapper. He is less likely to overcome the extra future burden than Expresso Star. My other each way hope, Titan Triumph, lost his race as soon as he came out of the stalls and stayed on the stands side. He prefers cover and never got that. Back on the dreaded All Weather, he should prove his poor turf run completely wrong.
The (4) and (5) dutch races failed on Saturday. The UK races gave a poor return (two wins from six races) and Nad Alsheba gave only one win from three. But elsewhere the ratings did reasonably well producing a couple of good priced 2nd top winners, Greylami 12/1 and Monfils Monfils 12/1. But I was amazed that a close 3rd top rated horse, Stage Acclaim, was allowed to start at 20/1. I watched the final stages of the race and expected a 5/1 to 6/1 SP. To say I was shocked at his winning price is an understatement. On my figures, he was the obvious each way bet against the two favourites. Even the bookies get it wrong sometimes.
Sunday is not an overly exciting betting day except for a handful of dutches, but I will be interested in the running of Palace Moon with a view to this season's major handicaps. His siblings include Sakhee's Secret, Palace Affair and King's Caprice. He has more stamina on his sire's side so it will be interesting to see if he shows promise of racing up to a mile - though the furthest distance his ten siblings have won over is 7f. Maybe the Victoria Cup is on his agenda?
Have a lazy Sunday afternoon.
Flipando ran a superb race in third but may similarly suffer at the hands of the handicapper. He is less likely to overcome the extra future burden than Expresso Star. My other each way hope, Titan Triumph, lost his race as soon as he came out of the stalls and stayed on the stands side. He prefers cover and never got that. Back on the dreaded All Weather, he should prove his poor turf run completely wrong.
The (4) and (5) dutch races failed on Saturday. The UK races gave a poor return (two wins from six races) and Nad Alsheba gave only one win from three. But elsewhere the ratings did reasonably well producing a couple of good priced 2nd top winners, Greylami 12/1 and Monfils Monfils 12/1. But I was amazed that a close 3rd top rated horse, Stage Acclaim, was allowed to start at 20/1. I watched the final stages of the race and expected a 5/1 to 6/1 SP. To say I was shocked at his winning price is an understatement. On my figures, he was the obvious each way bet against the two favourites. Even the bookies get it wrong sometimes.
Sunday is not an overly exciting betting day except for a handful of dutches, but I will be interested in the running of Palace Moon with a view to this season's major handicaps. His siblings include Sakhee's Secret, Palace Affair and King's Caprice. He has more stamina on his sire's side so it will be interesting to see if he shows promise of racing up to a mile - though the furthest distance his ten siblings have won over is 7f. Maybe the Victoria Cup is on his agenda?
Have a lazy Sunday afternoon.
Friday, 27 March 2009
We'll Be Brief
French Saulaie was a disappointment, Thursday, finishing only 4th. The optimistic would say he pulled too hard to do himself justice but, realistically, he is not the same horse over chases as he was over hurdles. He'll have to show marked improvement for me to back him again.
The (4) and (5) graded races we recommend for dutch betting performed well again, Friday. There were six such races and all were successful - though a couple were won by odds on shots. Four of the six were won by the clear top rated horse, the other two by the 2nd top rated.
So another very good day.
Saturday is a horrible looking day for betting. The highlight is, of course, the return of real flat racing at Doncaster. The fields are all large and you'll need a good dose of fortune to get a winner or two.
The feature is the Lincoln handicap which I always consider as a fun betting race. I never treat it as a race to get heavily involved in.
The top of TowerForm's handicap includes a couple of All Weather exceptions we alluded to in an earlier post. They are Flipando and Titan Triumph which run on opposite sides of the track. Sandwiched by these two is the ante post favourite, Expresso Star who is doubtful because I have seen no significant rain hereabouts (15 miles from Doncaster). John Gosden is to walk the course after the first race to see how the ground has reacted to a score of two-year-old hooves. If he likes what he sees the horse will run. Hopefully, he will run because we fancy him quite a lot. This could be the last handicap he contests because in our, and others, opinion, he is likely to progress to the lower ranks of group and the higher ranks of listed racing.
If Expresso Star doesn't run we will have a blind each way punt on Flipando and Titan Triumph - more in hope than in expectation. If there is a marked draw preference showing after the first three races, then you can throw the form book out of the window and just go with your gut. It is that type of race.
Elsewhere, Sue Smith has her team in cracking form at the moment and her Be Brief looks on a very lenient mark for his handicap debut in Uttoxeter's 4-20. We'll be looking to take an early price.
Be lucky.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Added Note: I have just discovered that the TowerForm Free Trial address has been malfunctioning (for want of a better word). I have found scores of free trial requests that we have not answered. I will be sending emails out to free trial applicants who have not received the free trial due to the malfunction. If you have asked for a free trial but have not received one this year (2009), please go to TowerForm HERE and re-send your request. Please accept my apologies.
The (4) and (5) graded races we recommend for dutch betting performed well again, Friday. There were six such races and all were successful - though a couple were won by odds on shots. Four of the six were won by the clear top rated horse, the other two by the 2nd top rated.
So another very good day.
Saturday is a horrible looking day for betting. The highlight is, of course, the return of real flat racing at Doncaster. The fields are all large and you'll need a good dose of fortune to get a winner or two.
The feature is the Lincoln handicap which I always consider as a fun betting race. I never treat it as a race to get heavily involved in.
The top of TowerForm's handicap includes a couple of All Weather exceptions we alluded to in an earlier post. They are Flipando and Titan Triumph which run on opposite sides of the track. Sandwiched by these two is the ante post favourite, Expresso Star who is doubtful because I have seen no significant rain hereabouts (15 miles from Doncaster). John Gosden is to walk the course after the first race to see how the ground has reacted to a score of two-year-old hooves. If he likes what he sees the horse will run. Hopefully, he will run because we fancy him quite a lot. This could be the last handicap he contests because in our, and others, opinion, he is likely to progress to the lower ranks of group and the higher ranks of listed racing.
If Expresso Star doesn't run we will have a blind each way punt on Flipando and Titan Triumph - more in hope than in expectation. If there is a marked draw preference showing after the first three races, then you can throw the form book out of the window and just go with your gut. It is that type of race.
Elsewhere, Sue Smith has her team in cracking form at the moment and her Be Brief looks on a very lenient mark for his handicap debut in Uttoxeter's 4-20. We'll be looking to take an early price.
Be lucky.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Added Note: I have just discovered that the TowerForm Free Trial address has been malfunctioning (for want of a better word). I have found scores of free trial requests that we have not answered. I will be sending emails out to free trial applicants who have not received the free trial due to the malfunction. If you have asked for a free trial but have not received one this year (2009), please go to TowerForm HERE and re-send your request. Please accept my apologies.
Thursday, 26 March 2009
The Dutch Have It
It turned out that the title of yesterday's blog (Un-Super Thursday) was very misleading.
Earcomesannie was taken out of Towcester's 3-20 race late morning. According to the BHA website the trainer produced a Self Certification citing the going as the reason. This must be a misprint because the horse has run 35 times and raced (and won) on good and better ground in 32 races. Very strange to say the least.
Just a note to the emailer (j****t*@******.net). I don't have a dislike of All Weather racing because my handicaps are useless at the tracks (or, to use the emailer's exact words, "because they are crap"). Today at Southwell the CLEAR top rated won FIVE out of SIX races - including beating the long odds on hotpot Green Agenda in the last and two other odds on favourites Jeremiah and Rough Sketch. Plus, the five dutch races (grade 4 races) at both Southwell and Wolverhampton ALL won.
Just so you clearly understand, j****t*@******.net, I dislike All Weather racing because it provides the absolute worst racing on the calendar.
In total on Thursday, there were ten grade (4) and (5) races. Eight won, four by the clear top rated and four by the second top rated.
So, it turned out to be a Super Thursday despite the poor fare on offer.
Quality-wise, Friday's Ascot card is disappointing. But there is one particulary intriguing race. The Novice Chase (2-55) is very competitive in the sense that I found it hard to figure out which horse would produce its best. All the runners have doubts surrounding them but French Saulaie has a touch of class the others don't possess. If he deigns to repeat his autumn 2nd to Poquelin he should beat these.
Finally, if there are any racing subjects you want me to write about that may or may not be helpful to you (except betting strategies which bore me), just leave a comment at the end of any blog entry (just click on Comment to open the text box)
Have a good Friday.
Earcomesannie was taken out of Towcester's 3-20 race late morning. According to the BHA website the trainer produced a Self Certification citing the going as the reason. This must be a misprint because the horse has run 35 times and raced (and won) on good and better ground in 32 races. Very strange to say the least.
Just a note to the emailer (j****t*@******.net). I don't have a dislike of All Weather racing because my handicaps are useless at the tracks (or, to use the emailer's exact words, "because they are crap"). Today at Southwell the CLEAR top rated won FIVE out of SIX races - including beating the long odds on hotpot Green Agenda in the last and two other odds on favourites Jeremiah and Rough Sketch. Plus, the five dutch races (grade 4 races) at both Southwell and Wolverhampton ALL won.
Just so you clearly understand, j****t*@******.net, I dislike All Weather racing because it provides the absolute worst racing on the calendar.
In total on Thursday, there were ten grade (4) and (5) races. Eight won, four by the clear top rated and four by the second top rated.
So, it turned out to be a Super Thursday despite the poor fare on offer.
Quality-wise, Friday's Ascot card is disappointing. But there is one particulary intriguing race. The Novice Chase (2-55) is very competitive in the sense that I found it hard to figure out which horse would produce its best. All the runners have doubts surrounding them but French Saulaie has a touch of class the others don't possess. If he deigns to repeat his autumn 2nd to Poquelin he should beat these.
Finally, if there are any racing subjects you want me to write about that may or may not be helpful to you (except betting strategies which bore me), just leave a comment at the end of any blog entry (just click on Comment to open the text box)
Have a good Friday.
Un-Super Thursday
I have had little time to spare having spent a lot of this evening writing other things. So, just the normal boring type of blog that permeates the web today, I'm afraid. Apologies.
Half the field defected yesterday to leave Spanish Conquest a long odds on winner. Tara Taylor ran a good race, just losing out over the final two flights. She looked booked for a place but hung badly in the closing stages under a competent only ride. She showed enough to suggest she'll pay us back in the future.
Discounting Peter Pole's race (he was a non runner and clear top rated of a 5 graded race), all our graded (4) and (5) races were won by either the clear top rated (5 wins) or the 2nd top rated (incl joints) (3 wins). So it was a good day overall.
Thursday has more racing than is scheduled for Saturday. Another example to prove the current people who create the fixture list need redeploying. I don't know where they were brought up, but in these parts Thursday is a normal working day for normal working people. Now Saturday's... that's when people here up t'north have a little bit of spare time.
Towcester is a course where both experience and an abundance of stamina are a priority. There are three horses in the 3-20 handicap chase that are interesting in that respect: Carry Duff, Freeline Fury, and Earcomesannie. We prefer the latter who has improved over 30 pounds since she last won here and is the only one of the three that is fully proven on the forecast ground. She ran a good 2nd off this mark last autumn and has had a good break since falling early last time at Doncaster.
Have a good day.
Half the field defected yesterday to leave Spanish Conquest a long odds on winner. Tara Taylor ran a good race, just losing out over the final two flights. She looked booked for a place but hung badly in the closing stages under a competent only ride. She showed enough to suggest she'll pay us back in the future.
Discounting Peter Pole's race (he was a non runner and clear top rated of a 5 graded race), all our graded (4) and (5) races were won by either the clear top rated (5 wins) or the 2nd top rated (incl joints) (3 wins). So it was a good day overall.
Thursday has more racing than is scheduled for Saturday. Another example to prove the current people who create the fixture list need redeploying. I don't know where they were brought up, but in these parts Thursday is a normal working day for normal working people. Now Saturday's... that's when people here up t'north have a little bit of spare time.
Towcester is a course where both experience and an abundance of stamina are a priority. There are three horses in the 3-20 handicap chase that are interesting in that respect: Carry Duff, Freeline Fury, and Earcomesannie. We prefer the latter who has improved over 30 pounds since she last won here and is the only one of the three that is fully proven on the forecast ground. She ran a good 2nd off this mark last autumn and has had a good break since falling early last time at Doncaster.
Have a good day.
Tuesday, 24 March 2009
1066 and All That
The book of this blog's title can only be appreciated if you have a moderate grasp of English history. Published in 1930 and reprinted virtually every year since, it is one of the funniest books I have ever read. I recommend it to anyone.
But what has it to do with horse racing?
The writers claimed the book provided all the history you could remember and in the preface they said "History is not what you thought. It is what you can remember".
These two sentences come to mind every time I hear stories of people who once used or knew someone who once used a system that always won. When asked what the system is or was, and why are they not using it now to win some money, the air becomes replete with vague replies and nebulous outlines of what the system rules were. They can't precisely remember what the system was except for; "If I remember correctly, it went something like this...." Then, depending on who is relating the rules, you begin to hear opaque references to form figures, weight in handicaps, tips of certain pundits, where the horse ran when backed down to a certain price, what type of race the horse last ran in, Towerfo - sorry - Timeform ratings in certain races, ad infinitum.
Here, I have to pass on my absolute favourite: Use Spotform in the Daily Mirror (now simply The Mirror) in handicaps. If the Spotform horse finished out of the first four last time out, then, starting at the bottom of the handicap and going up horse by horse, the first one that finished in the first four last time out was the bet. If the horse was ridden by an apprentice it was a nap bet. I cringe to admit I actually checked it. Of course, I soon discovered it was pure bunkum. But when I told the conveyer of this priceless system exactly what I thought of it, he told me I must have done something wrong. Hilariously, after a short pause, he said, "Hold on. It might have been Formcast in the Daily Mail, or was it in The Sun...."
In my long experience, there is no such thing as a winning system. All supposed systems are merely ephemeral trends. Someone sees the forecast second favourite win three claiming races in a row and they assume they have discovered the Golden Egg. Eventually, the system fails, money is lost and the system is disregarded. Unfortunately, such systemites continue their search for a winning, infallible system, continue to lose money, then eventually come to the conclusion that you can't win at racing unless you are on speaking terms with trainers, owners, jockeys, the stable cat, or Mother Shipton.
There are methods you can use to come to a selection, but method is not an exact synonym for system. Some people say it is the same thing. It is not. I cover this on site at the bottom of this page HERE
There is another section on TowerForm HERE which could cause you to call me a hypocrite. But they are not systems. If you read the first paragraph, I call them "pin-sticking methods" that people should not use without thought but to "Adapt them to suit your own needs an inclinations". (In passing, pin-sticking is a method my brother uses on the All Weather to devastating effect!)
A system has rules to follow and if most of the rules are met, the horse being studied is a selection. That sounds fine. But the error systemites make is that when the system hits a bad patch, they "adapt" the rules to minimise losers. This normally has the effect not only of reducing selections considerably, but also reducing the magical Return on Investment (ROI) - if there was one in the first place. The fact is they are not "adapting", they are tinkering. Effectly, they are subconsciously admitting defeat. Curiously, when they consciously admit defeat, they continue their fruitless search.
Naturally, some who read this will say continual winning systems do exist - they are using them. But to those I would say go back and work out how you use the system, then return to the bottom of THIS PAGE and tell me how you make your tea....
To Wednesday....
If you got your crinkle cut crisps yesterday, you should also have managed (just) to get the can of coke from the small profit on the singles bets. Today's racing should have been scheduled for Good Friday because there is nothing that leaps totally off the page except for a handful of hot favourites (PeterPole will be long odds on again, no doubt). The best likely odds against favourite seems to be Spanish Conquest (4-00 Taunton). But a small each way bet on Tara Taylor (2-10 Towcester) interests me. Currently forecast at 12/1, she has been given a reasonable mark for her handicap debut and looks to have a fair chance of a placing at least.
But what has it to do with horse racing?
The writers claimed the book provided all the history you could remember and in the preface they said "History is not what you thought. It is what you can remember".
These two sentences come to mind every time I hear stories of people who once used or knew someone who once used a system that always won. When asked what the system is or was, and why are they not using it now to win some money, the air becomes replete with vague replies and nebulous outlines of what the system rules were. They can't precisely remember what the system was except for; "If I remember correctly, it went something like this...." Then, depending on who is relating the rules, you begin to hear opaque references to form figures, weight in handicaps, tips of certain pundits, where the horse ran when backed down to a certain price, what type of race the horse last ran in, Towerfo - sorry - Timeform ratings in certain races, ad infinitum.
Here, I have to pass on my absolute favourite: Use Spotform in the Daily Mirror (now simply The Mirror) in handicaps. If the Spotform horse finished out of the first four last time out, then, starting at the bottom of the handicap and going up horse by horse, the first one that finished in the first four last time out was the bet. If the horse was ridden by an apprentice it was a nap bet. I cringe to admit I actually checked it. Of course, I soon discovered it was pure bunkum. But when I told the conveyer of this priceless system exactly what I thought of it, he told me I must have done something wrong. Hilariously, after a short pause, he said, "Hold on. It might have been Formcast in the Daily Mail, or was it in The Sun...."
In my long experience, there is no such thing as a winning system. All supposed systems are merely ephemeral trends. Someone sees the forecast second favourite win three claiming races in a row and they assume they have discovered the Golden Egg. Eventually, the system fails, money is lost and the system is disregarded. Unfortunately, such systemites continue their search for a winning, infallible system, continue to lose money, then eventually come to the conclusion that you can't win at racing unless you are on speaking terms with trainers, owners, jockeys, the stable cat, or Mother Shipton.
There are methods you can use to come to a selection, but method is not an exact synonym for system. Some people say it is the same thing. It is not. I cover this on site at the bottom of this page HERE
There is another section on TowerForm HERE which could cause you to call me a hypocrite. But they are not systems. If you read the first paragraph, I call them "pin-sticking methods" that people should not use without thought but to "Adapt them to suit your own needs an inclinations". (In passing, pin-sticking is a method my brother uses on the All Weather to devastating effect!)
A system has rules to follow and if most of the rules are met, the horse being studied is a selection. That sounds fine. But the error systemites make is that when the system hits a bad patch, they "adapt" the rules to minimise losers. This normally has the effect not only of reducing selections considerably, but also reducing the magical Return on Investment (ROI) - if there was one in the first place. The fact is they are not "adapting", they are tinkering. Effectly, they are subconsciously admitting defeat. Curiously, when they consciously admit defeat, they continue their fruitless search.
Naturally, some who read this will say continual winning systems do exist - they are using them. But to those I would say go back and work out how you use the system, then return to the bottom of THIS PAGE and tell me how you make your tea....
To Wednesday....
If you got your crinkle cut crisps yesterday, you should also have managed (just) to get the can of coke from the small profit on the singles bets. Today's racing should have been scheduled for Good Friday because there is nothing that leaps totally off the page except for a handful of hot favourites (PeterPole will be long odds on again, no doubt). The best likely odds against favourite seems to be Spanish Conquest (4-00 Taunton). But a small each way bet on Tara Taylor (2-10 Towcester) interests me. Currently forecast at 12/1, she has been given a reasonable mark for her handicap debut and looks to have a fair chance of a placing at least.
Monday, 23 March 2009
Success is relative (usually your cousin)
I'm writing th-hic-this from the pub.
Obe Royal got beaten by a 66/1 outsider in the claimer, only just regaining 2nd close home by a nose. Compton Star ran a stinker in a selling race won effortlessly by a horse with even worse past form than him. Such are selling races, I suppose. They were all in that race for the very good reason that they are not very good.
Those who know TowerForm well will have been surprised I included a seller in my post yesterday. But when you desert your principles it is fitting that your derriere receives a good kicking. So I deserved that.
But success can never be judged on a couple of results. The dutching races ( 4 and 5 graded races - for explanation of these please go HERE ) were as successful as expected - if you ignore the All Weather races, dagnabbit!
There were six NH dutching races and six NH winning dutches. All three All Weather dutches failed, including the Obe Royal dutch bet I unfortunately recommended. But that's the All Weather for you. On site I refer to All Weather results like so: "Tis like the howling of Irish wolves against the moon." I said in my first posting that the All Weather is "a surface that can throw up many wierd and bewildering results." Today was no different.
I have an inbuilt dislike of artificial surfaces. They are okay, I suppose, to supplement small stable's income but they are no good for punters at all. No horse likes the surfaces, most run with the choke in, and many absolutely detest the kickback. All this talk about horses liking the tracks is nonsense. The tracks are simply suited to some of their racing styles and physiques. Most of the horses are "turf rejects", i.e. horses that show little or no promise of a turf win. If you doubt that assertion just try an experiment. Go to the Racing Post website on any All Weather racing day. Check the form of All Weather winners. If you click on the "Statistics" tab you can easily see all the horse's past form at every track it has raced on. Now, compare its All Weather form to its turf form. Answers on a postcard, please (but don't quote the likes of Young Mick - there are exceptions to every rule).
All Weather surfaces are ideal for getting a horse fit to race. In fact, more and more trainers are using them on the gallops. It provides a consistent surface that yields to a horses hoof and has minimal maintenance. Unlike turf, artificial surfaces can be used when there is no rain (hard turf surface) and when there has been too much rain (making turf bottomless or waterlogged). So it is easy to see why trainers are beginning to prefer an artificial galloping surface. But it doesn't follow that the trainers like All Weather racing. Small trainers do. The predominantly low grade racing is a godsend for trainers of moderate horses. Good for them. Bad for us.
The very best trainers use the All Weather sparingly; and here I'm talking about the Stoute's, Gosden's and Jarvis's. When they do run horses on these surfaces it is for extra racing experience or for one of the reasons I noted earlier. Mark Johnston uses the All Weather a lot more than other big trainers, but in the main his best horses don't go near the stuff.
Those are my views, like them, hate them, love them, or bewilder at them. I ain't gonna change my views.
To Tuesday, if I dare..........
Peter Pole, Presque Prendre and Bajan Tryst are a good treble if you are short of coppers to buy a packet of crisps - crinkle cut if any of them drift to 4/7. But singles on Sparrow Hills (3-40 Southwell) and Gilded Youth (5-10 Southwell) should buy you a can of Coke to wash the crisps down
Obe Royal got beaten by a 66/1 outsider in the claimer, only just regaining 2nd close home by a nose. Compton Star ran a stinker in a selling race won effortlessly by a horse with even worse past form than him. Such are selling races, I suppose. They were all in that race for the very good reason that they are not very good.
Those who know TowerForm well will have been surprised I included a seller in my post yesterday. But when you desert your principles it is fitting that your derriere receives a good kicking. So I deserved that.
But success can never be judged on a couple of results. The dutching races ( 4 and 5 graded races - for explanation of these please go HERE ) were as successful as expected - if you ignore the All Weather races, dagnabbit!
There were six NH dutching races and six NH winning dutches. All three All Weather dutches failed, including the Obe Royal dutch bet I unfortunately recommended. But that's the All Weather for you. On site I refer to All Weather results like so: "Tis like the howling of Irish wolves against the moon." I said in my first posting that the All Weather is "a surface that can throw up many wierd and bewildering results." Today was no different.
I have an inbuilt dislike of artificial surfaces. They are okay, I suppose, to supplement small stable's income but they are no good for punters at all. No horse likes the surfaces, most run with the choke in, and many absolutely detest the kickback. All this talk about horses liking the tracks is nonsense. The tracks are simply suited to some of their racing styles and physiques. Most of the horses are "turf rejects", i.e. horses that show little or no promise of a turf win. If you doubt that assertion just try an experiment. Go to the Racing Post website on any All Weather racing day. Check the form of All Weather winners. If you click on the "Statistics" tab you can easily see all the horse's past form at every track it has raced on. Now, compare its All Weather form to its turf form. Answers on a postcard, please (but don't quote the likes of Young Mick - there are exceptions to every rule).
All Weather surfaces are ideal for getting a horse fit to race. In fact, more and more trainers are using them on the gallops. It provides a consistent surface that yields to a horses hoof and has minimal maintenance. Unlike turf, artificial surfaces can be used when there is no rain (hard turf surface) and when there has been too much rain (making turf bottomless or waterlogged). So it is easy to see why trainers are beginning to prefer an artificial galloping surface. But it doesn't follow that the trainers like All Weather racing. Small trainers do. The predominantly low grade racing is a godsend for trainers of moderate horses. Good for them. Bad for us.
The very best trainers use the All Weather sparingly; and here I'm talking about the Stoute's, Gosden's and Jarvis's. When they do run horses on these surfaces it is for extra racing experience or for one of the reasons I noted earlier. Mark Johnston uses the All Weather a lot more than other big trainers, but in the main his best horses don't go near the stuff.
Those are my views, like them, hate them, love them, or bewilder at them. I ain't gonna change my views.
To Tuesday, if I dare..........
Peter Pole, Presque Prendre and Bajan Tryst are a good treble if you are short of coppers to buy a packet of crisps - crinkle cut if any of them drift to 4/7. But singles on Sparrow Hills (3-40 Southwell) and Gilded Youth (5-10 Southwell) should buy you a can of Coke to wash the crisps down
Sunday, 22 March 2009
I'm not so think as you drunk I am.........
Well, connections took one look at yesterday's blog and withdrew Haajes. Didn't know they were Catholic...............
Hopefully, Haajes is okay. The reason for withdrawal was lameness. Possibly a subliminal comment on Sunday's posting. Ah, well.
Monday looks no better than Sunday at first glance but a closer look seems to throw up a few good bets. Yet I can't help remembering the paraphrase "Just when you thought it was safe to go in the bookies...."
Days that promise so much profit usually end up providing the bookie with his next Caribbean holiday. Though if dutch betting is your game you should be in seventh heaven, or on cloud nine, or in the pub drinking heavily and philosophising about the vagaries of fortune. Such is Monday.
I'll not list all the single bet opportunities (and you need to subscribe to discover the best dutching bets. HERE if you're interested in a Spring Discount of our handicaps) so I'll just go through a couple of the non-odds on fancies I have.
Obe Royal (2-20 Wolverhampton) is a good starting point. He's been in the form of his life this winter and would be well clear in the ratings were it not for the hard to evaluate Western Art. The latter is rated well above today's field and on past form would make this race a procession. But the fact the he was bought very cheaply by the Easterby's tells a story, as does the fact that a horse of his past talent is put in a claimer. Something has obviously gone amiss with the horse since he last ran poorly over 300 days ago. Past experience of such horses points to the fact he is in this claimer simply as a "finding out" exercise. Such horses are generally put in at a claiming price of £10 000. And guess what? So I am as confident as I can be that the Easterby's will base the horse's future entries on his performance here. If you are not convinced of this I would at the least recommend you have a Dutch bet.
Another one runs in a race type I rarely entertain but he could get placed at a decent each way price: Compton Star (4-15 Plumpton). His form will horrify the weaker hearted of you but he goes into the race with a realistic chance. His last three runs have been in a hurdle race last time (tailed off) and two chases (pulled up both times). Not the sort of form that gives him an obvious chance - especially since he has won only three times in a forty-nine race career. But the distance, the class and the fresh good ground are ideal. He had a break before running last time and quite simply "blew up" three out on ground he doesn't particularly go well on.
Make no mistake, this field contains some of the slowest, most moderate horses plying their trade. None are trustworthy and few, if any, have the scope or ability to improve. Only Royal Prodigy has shown the level of form in the past equivalent to what Compton Star has shown.
So there it is. Whatever the results enjoy the racing the best you can. It does get better soon. And if you're wondering where I'll be tomorrow after racing, well, if the worst happens, see you in the pub.
Hopefully, Haajes is okay. The reason for withdrawal was lameness. Possibly a subliminal comment on Sunday's posting. Ah, well.
Monday looks no better than Sunday at first glance but a closer look seems to throw up a few good bets. Yet I can't help remembering the paraphrase "Just when you thought it was safe to go in the bookies...."
Days that promise so much profit usually end up providing the bookie with his next Caribbean holiday. Though if dutch betting is your game you should be in seventh heaven, or on cloud nine, or in the pub drinking heavily and philosophising about the vagaries of fortune. Such is Monday.
I'll not list all the single bet opportunities (and you need to subscribe to discover the best dutching bets. HERE if you're interested in a Spring Discount of our handicaps) so I'll just go through a couple of the non-odds on fancies I have.
Obe Royal (2-20 Wolverhampton) is a good starting point. He's been in the form of his life this winter and would be well clear in the ratings were it not for the hard to evaluate Western Art. The latter is rated well above today's field and on past form would make this race a procession. But the fact the he was bought very cheaply by the Easterby's tells a story, as does the fact that a horse of his past talent is put in a claimer. Something has obviously gone amiss with the horse since he last ran poorly over 300 days ago. Past experience of such horses points to the fact he is in this claimer simply as a "finding out" exercise. Such horses are generally put in at a claiming price of £10 000. And guess what? So I am as confident as I can be that the Easterby's will base the horse's future entries on his performance here. If you are not convinced of this I would at the least recommend you have a Dutch bet.
Another one runs in a race type I rarely entertain but he could get placed at a decent each way price: Compton Star (4-15 Plumpton). His form will horrify the weaker hearted of you but he goes into the race with a realistic chance. His last three runs have been in a hurdle race last time (tailed off) and two chases (pulled up both times). Not the sort of form that gives him an obvious chance - especially since he has won only three times in a forty-nine race career. But the distance, the class and the fresh good ground are ideal. He had a break before running last time and quite simply "blew up" three out on ground he doesn't particularly go well on.
Make no mistake, this field contains some of the slowest, most moderate horses plying their trade. None are trustworthy and few, if any, have the scope or ability to improve. Only Royal Prodigy has shown the level of form in the past equivalent to what Compton Star has shown.
So there it is. Whatever the results enjoy the racing the best you can. It does get better soon. And if you're wondering where I'll be tomorrow after racing, well, if the worst happens, see you in the pub.
Saturday, 21 March 2009
Welcome to TowerForm's first blog
Many people have emailed us about our comments on jockeys (you can read some of our views halfway down THIS PAGE ). It is a fact of horse racing that a jockey will sometimes let you down by riding a very ill judged race. It would be churlish of me to give examples - and anyway, many would probably question my authority to pass judgement on a professional jockey.
True, I have never ridden a horse in competition. But I have watched thousands of races over the years and am thus qualified to make judgements based on what I see - just as a football fan can pass judgement when a striker misses a sitter....
One jockey recently excused losing on a very long odds on shot by saying "the pace didn't suit him." Forgive me, but I have to say that good jockeys ride to win the race first then worry if anything is going to catch them in the closing stages, making pace a non issue. Unfortunately, far too many jockeys adore looking good i.e. they like to pose. They love to be seen sitting motionless, waiting to pounce. Inevitably, many such jockeys look absolutely stupid in the closing stages when the "steering job" fails to pick up with any authority - never mind speed.
But to Sunday's racing.
Another Sunday offering moderate horses in low grade racing. We never completely trust Class 5 or 6 horses to run to form. Many obviously will run to form today, though almost all won't. They equally obviously run in these races because they are decidedly moderate; which brings me to Haajes in Southwell's 2-30 selling race.
He is a fair horse that has been runing with credit against the best All Weather handicap sprinters this winter. Though the handicapper has him firmly in his grip he has run to a mark within five pounds of his official mark. In handicapping terms that is the form of a very consistent performer.
So why run him in a seller? I can only assume that his owner (Willie McKay) is beginning a clear out. Having said that, it is a seller run on an artificial surface, a surface that can throw up many wierd and bewildering results. I have him thirteen pounds better in with his nearest rival (Grimes Faith) which very roughly equates to about four lengths. There are downsides to his form, however.
He has run seven times on the All Weather being in the frame only twice (both this year including a win); he has never won in the months from March to July (seven runs and only one place); and his trainer (S Parr) has a meagre 5% win record at the course.
Compare that to Grimes Faith. He has run twelve times at Southwell, winning five and being placed 2nd and third on five other occasions; his jockey has never been out of the frame when riding him; and the horse has only been out of the first three twice this All Weather season - one of those times times he would have been placed but for an unlucky run.
So if Grimes Faith improves again and runs a couple of pounds better than his mark and Haajes runs a couple of lengths below form (feasible since he has only run to form once at Southwell) then Grimes Faith can win. Or can he?
I hope this post highlights how difficult it can get laying a favourite. All the history counts against Haajes. Yet he is so far clear on figures he should win regardless. But Conflictofinterest had so many positives the other day that it couldn't get beat - but it did.
How many people would have bet against Conflictofinterest? Layers, of course will tell us that every horse has a price that begs laying. But I strongly suspect people layed Conflictofinterest more in outlandish hope than in conviction, knowing that if they were wrong, they wouldn't lose a great deal.
I never lay horses, I bet them to win - with the bookies. Though I won't be betting on Haajes. He will either be too short or he will drift alarmingly. And I am not going to second guess that.
True, I have never ridden a horse in competition. But I have watched thousands of races over the years and am thus qualified to make judgements based on what I see - just as a football fan can pass judgement when a striker misses a sitter....
One jockey recently excused losing on a very long odds on shot by saying "the pace didn't suit him." Forgive me, but I have to say that good jockeys ride to win the race first then worry if anything is going to catch them in the closing stages, making pace a non issue. Unfortunately, far too many jockeys adore looking good i.e. they like to pose. They love to be seen sitting motionless, waiting to pounce. Inevitably, many such jockeys look absolutely stupid in the closing stages when the "steering job" fails to pick up with any authority - never mind speed.
But to Sunday's racing.
Another Sunday offering moderate horses in low grade racing. We never completely trust Class 5 or 6 horses to run to form. Many obviously will run to form today, though almost all won't. They equally obviously run in these races because they are decidedly moderate; which brings me to Haajes in Southwell's 2-30 selling race.
He is a fair horse that has been runing with credit against the best All Weather handicap sprinters this winter. Though the handicapper has him firmly in his grip he has run to a mark within five pounds of his official mark. In handicapping terms that is the form of a very consistent performer.
So why run him in a seller? I can only assume that his owner (Willie McKay) is beginning a clear out. Having said that, it is a seller run on an artificial surface, a surface that can throw up many wierd and bewildering results. I have him thirteen pounds better in with his nearest rival (Grimes Faith) which very roughly equates to about four lengths. There are downsides to his form, however.
He has run seven times on the All Weather being in the frame only twice (both this year including a win); he has never won in the months from March to July (seven runs and only one place); and his trainer (S Parr) has a meagre 5% win record at the course.
Compare that to Grimes Faith. He has run twelve times at Southwell, winning five and being placed 2nd and third on five other occasions; his jockey has never been out of the frame when riding him; and the horse has only been out of the first three twice this All Weather season - one of those times times he would have been placed but for an unlucky run.
So if Grimes Faith improves again and runs a couple of pounds better than his mark and Haajes runs a couple of lengths below form (feasible since he has only run to form once at Southwell) then Grimes Faith can win. Or can he?
I hope this post highlights how difficult it can get laying a favourite. All the history counts against Haajes. Yet he is so far clear on figures he should win regardless. But Conflictofinterest had so many positives the other day that it couldn't get beat - but it did.
How many people would have bet against Conflictofinterest? Layers, of course will tell us that every horse has a price that begs laying. But I strongly suspect people layed Conflictofinterest more in outlandish hope than in conviction, knowing that if they were wrong, they wouldn't lose a great deal.
I never lay horses, I bet them to win - with the bookies. Though I won't be betting on Haajes. He will either be too short or he will drift alarmingly. And I am not going to second guess that.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
