Saturday, November 28, 2009
Monday, July 13, 2009
(This is the third of an ongoing RedRockorBust series profiling qualifiers for the 2010 National Handicapping Championship.)
Rich Nilsen, 38, qualified for the 2010 National Handicapping Championship courtesy of finishing 3rd in a Keeneland contest in April. Nilsen, of Lexington, Kentucky, spoke to RedRockorBust in a July 10 telephone interview.
RedRockorBust: You qualified for the 2010 NHC at Keeneland in the spring. Tell me about the day.
Rich Nilsen: It was pouring rain all day, just a miserable day. It was an unusual day and a disappointing card by Keeneland standards. This was a real money contest, sometimes in these contests you grind it out with a slow and methodical approach, and dive in when you have a good feel. But I didn't think there were any solid show bets on the entire card, so I thought I had to attack each race individually -- think to myself, "how can I take this $200 and make a profit?"
I liked a few horses Julien Leparoux rode, and he had a couple double-digit winners. But one of my key races was in the middle of the card, a horse named Final Count was exiting a key race at Gulfstream that was won by eventual stakes runner Afirmatif. There had been a few horses who came out of that race and ran well. Final Count was well-beaten by Afirmatif, he came in 10th, 14 3/4 lengths back, but he had legitimate excuses. So I thought there were a lot of positive factors. I played him to win and in exactas and trifectas, and he won at 17-1 with Rene Douglas aboard.
I kept cashing all day and was in 6th place heading into the last race. I figured I needed to make about $1,000 to break into the top 3 and qualify. In the last race, the horses I liked best ran 1-2. I had the exacta and trifecta. Leparoux rode the winner, a horse named Cross Village, he was 5-1 on the morning line but he went off at 13-1. I made a couple thousand dollars on the race, and ended up with about $5,200 from a starting bankroll of $1,800. I finished 4th, but one of the top 3 finishers had already qualified, so I got the spot.
RRB: What is your history in handicapping contests? Have you made it to the NHC before?
RN: I've been playing contests for more than 10 years. I have qualified for the NHC seven times. I finished 8th in the 2001 event after being a co-leader on the first day. That was my best performance -- $9,000 in total winnings. Other years I've finished mid-pack or up the track.
RRB: How long have you been playing the horses?
RN: I started playing horses in New York around age 7 when my dad used to take me. I watched the Harvey Pack show as a teenager. I then decided to go to the University of Louisville for their equine business degree. I have worked in the industry ever since, serving as director of marketing for Brisnet.com, and previously for the account wagering sites BrisBET and WinTicket.com. I am currently the tournament director at both Brisnet.com and TwinSpires.com.
RRB: Will you approach the 2010 NHC any differently than your previous Vegas experiences?
RN: I'm going to try to treat it more like any other contest. I have "overthunk" the NHC in the past, putting too much time into it while trying to do too much. I'm not going to kill myself in the days leading up to the NHC event or at the event itself. A few years ago I would try to handicap every race at every track. I couldn't bear to think that maybe a $40 horse would come in at The Fair Grounds and I didn't have it because I didn't look at the race! But I think it's an impossible task to handicap every race at every track. I'll just watch how the tracks are playing, be familiar with who the hot jockeys and trainers are at each track, and hope that the cards I'm dealt are the types of races I excel at.
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
(This is the second of an ongoing RedRockorBust series profiling qualifiers for the 2010 National Handicapping Championship.)
A 22-1 shot prevented Dennis Decauwer from winning all the marbles in the 2009 National Handicapping Championship. Still, finishing second and taking home $150,000 wasn't too shabby, and he will be back at the Red Rock in 2010, courtesy of his qualifying via a Santa Anita contest in March.
Decauwer, 59, is a "mostly retired" CPA who has been a horseplayer for 40 years, a horse owner for 20 years, and a handicapping contest player for 10 years. The Rancho Cucamonga, Calif., resident answered RedRockorBust's questions via e-mail.
Red Rock or Bust: Have you had any success in contests before this year?
Dennis Decauwer: Success in contests can come and go. The last couple of years have been good for me including a 2nd place finish in the most recent NHC at Red Rock, a win in the very recent Las Vegas Hilton Pick the Ponies and a 2nd in last October’s Pick the Ponies.
I am a 5-time qualifier for the NHC and they have come in various ways, although my favorite formats are the live money contests such as Santa Anita’s. I have qualified twice there and once in a similar contest at Del Mar as well as at “monopoly money” contests (Fairplex Park and TOC—Calif. owners contest).
DD: I feel strategies differ significantly in different types of contests. If all races are mandatory, you must find as many winners as you can. When races are optional, finding price horses is critical as all players will be looking for opportunities to do the same. In live bankroll contests, betting is often more conservative as players might treat their own bankroll differently from “monopoly money”.
Setting targets for tournament totals is, generally, a good thing before you start, because most tournaments will end up in a predictable range of a multiple of starting bankroll. The best advice I can give is not be afraid of playing price horses and do not pay much attention to leader boards until late into contests.
RRB: The 2010 NHC is a long way off, but how are you thinking about it now (if you are at all)? Will you go in with any expectations or goals?
DD: As far as tournament goals, I always think I can win (that is a MUST attitude)! In preparation, my essentials include knowing how each track has been playing and watching as much video as I can. Having said that, one still needs to be lucky to win any contest—you need to win the photo finishes and get the right trips with your horses.
RRB: Dennis Decauwer, thank you.
DD: Good luck and let me know if I can answer anything else for you.
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
In "Survival", players pick a horse in each of the three races the track selects for that day -- usually, the feature and maybe two of the other races with relatively big fields. As long as at least one of your horses hit the board, you "survive" and move on to the next day, and whatever your horse(s) pay to win, place and/or show is tallied in your mythical bankroll. You get one "life preserver", or mulligan, where you can not hit the board on one day -- the second day you don't hit the board with any of your selections, you're out. The last one standing wins the contest, or if (more likely) there are multiple survivors at meet's end, the survivor with the highest bankroll goes to the Red Rock.
"Survival" is fun and free, and the winner qualifies for the NHC. However, there already 2,283 people signed up three days before the contest starts, so it's a bit of a lottery-ticket proposition and I'm certainly not packing my bags for Vegas just because I'm registered.
I've tried this contest in a few previous years. Once about 4 years ago I was one of about 300 people still alive through mid-June or so, but that was as far as I got. Other times I either forgot to make selections or finished off the board twice in the first week or two. Advancing on any given day sounds easy, but I have learned that it is surprisingly not difficult to have your three selections finish off the board.
Anyway, the first days are the biggest elimination days as people who signed up forget to make picks -- I'd guesstimate that a starting field of 2,500-3,000 gets whittled down to half that by the end of Memorial Day Weekend. I plan to remember to make picks every day this year, and of course I plan to hit the board every day, but as Mike Tyson said, everybody has a plan until they get hit.
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
Rachel Alexandra looks formidable, but I'm willing to give Friesan Fire a pass for his no-show Derby, and he is my pick on Saturday. I don't think Friesan had the worst trip in the world at Churchill, but Derby history is littered with top horses who didn't run a lick in the Derby and came back strong. I haven't seen any morning lines yet but I'd guess Friesan may go off at 5-1 at least, which would be decent-enough odds.
And for Preakness Stakes Odds, Preakness Picks, or Preakness Stakes Results, head on over to docsports.com.
Monday, May 11, 2009
(This is the first of an ongoing RedRockorBust series profiling qualifiers for the 2010 National Handicapping Championship.)
Richard Goodall, 65, is not your garden-variety NHC qualifier. You see, he happens to be one of only 10 people on the planet who have won the whole shebang. That's right, in 2008, Goodall topped a NHC field of 277 to win the big kahuna, and it was no squeaker -- his $272.30 bankroll set an NHC record for largest margin of victory. Goodall punched his ticket for the 2010 NHC via a Santa Anita contest back in March.
Goodall, a former attorney, estimates he has been playing the horses for 50 years, and he has played handicapping contests since their inception, approximately 25 years ago. He spoke to Red Rock or Bust from his Las Vegas home.
Red Rock or Bust: What is your strategy for handicapping contests?
Richard Goodall: I am a longshot player. I'm either very good or very bad. Most times I'll either be on the leaderboard or finish with $0. I rarely finish mid-pack. Finishing 32nd is no better than finishing last.
Every contest has its own rules -- cap or no cap, real money or mythical wagers, and so on. In order to win, you have to have at least one big-priced horse. I remember one contest at the Orleans Casino about three years ago that was all chalk, but that is extremely rare. So somewhere you have to step out of the box.
The only time I'd ever consider playing a favorite is if you think you're ahead in the contest and want to preserve capital. I'll never bet a 2-1 shot in an early race, I'd rather eat the ticket. You have to have the mindset that you're going to win, and you won't win by betting 2-1 horses.
In real-money contests, I'm fairly conservative in that I try to make a 10- or 20-race contest into a 2-race contest. On the last day or in the last race is when you play the horse you want to play, rather than spreading out.
RRB: It sounds like that approach can be linked to turf racing, where jockeys typically try conserve their mount and stay in the hunt before sprinting the last quarter-mile.
RG: Yes, that's a good analogy. The smart thing is to conserve and then make a big push toward the wire.
RRB: What if the horse you like best on a contest card is entered in an early race? Wouldn't you bet big early?
RG: That horse doesn't exist for me. No matter how much I love the horse, if it's not time to love a horse, I won't play the horse big. I will be cognizant that I like a horse more and maybe play $30 rather than $20, but I'm not going all in.
If you make a big score early in a contest, everybody knows their own math as to how they get to where you are. There are no tourists off the street in the big-money contests.
RRB: What is your strategy for mythical-bankroll contests?
RG: In mythical-bankroll contests you always want to save one bullet for the end. Contest strategy can be more important than handicapping. I always try to handicap later races first, always try to find a bailout horse, a 15-1 shot, a 6-1 shot. Whatever it would take to have a chance to win.
RRB: You qualified for the 2010 NHC via a contest at Santa Anita in March. What was your key score or scores?
RG: In the last race a horse was third-choice on the morning line, but my software rated him as the first choice. I put about $1,200 of my $5,000 on him, he won and paid about $12.
RRB: Will you do anything different in the 2010 NHC, or stick with what works?
RG: I'm too old to change. I do think the common advice to take shots in races that are not mandatory and score points in the mandatory races is wrong. That may keep you from being on the bottom but it keeps you from getting to the top. If you can hit longshots in the mandatory races, you can separate yourself.
Also, if you're betting a longshot at Santa Anita or Aqueduct, you can be sure than 40 others have that horse too. Fewer people will have longshots from Tampa, Fairgrounds, or Oaklawn, so a good strategy is to play those tracks.
Around November I start getting ready for the NHC. I try to be all over Tampa and Fairgrounds, I think that gives me an advantage. If you can be a contrarian in any way, you can beat the crowd.
I'm just an OK handicapper. I'm a contest player. I think I understand the makeup of contests better than most players.
RRB: Thank you, Mr. Goodall.
RG: Good luck.
Saturday, May 2, 2009
Friday, May 1, 2009
My other contest picks for today are:
Contest Race #2, Edgewood S.: Abbott Hall
Contest Race #3, Alysheba S.: Dr. Pleasure
Contest Race #4, American Turf S.: Bittel Road
Contest Race #5, Kentucky Oaks: Rachel Alexandra
I'm hoping I can still be in the hunt at the end of the day, which means I probably need at least one decent-priced winner plus a decent-priced placer. Rachel Alexandra won't count towards that, as she figures to be 3-5 or so.
Races 6-10 are tomorrow.
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
Things start to perk up on the NHC Tour contest schedule as well. By my very unofficial count, so far 53 lucky folks have qualified for the 2010 National Handicapping Championship at the Red Rock. Assuming a 275-person field, that means there are still more than 200 spots up for grabs.
This weekend's main event is an online NHC Tour thingamabob that spans Friday and Saturday. The contest qualifies 2 for Vegas, but I'm assuming the field will be 800ish (as was the Feb. 28 NHC Tour Fountain of Youth event), so it's sort of like a lottery-ticket proposition. Beyond just the top 2, the top 30 finishers earn points that can help qualify you down the road.
The other contest thingamajig that starts this weekend is Public Handicapper, which I could swear used to qualify folks for the NHC, but now I'm seeing it qualifies people for the Horseplayer World Series. Public Handicapper is free so maybe I'll try it for fun, but to me, the HWS is to the NIT what the NHC is to the NCAA Tourney, so I'm not that interested.
Monday, April 20, 2009
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
I believe the Kentucky Derby is the most over-analyzed horse race in America, and largely a crapshoot. From a handicapping perspective, it’s tough to have much confidence that your horse will win, as 20-horse fields create traffic jams and brutal trips that just cannot be predicted. Other variables such as the 1 1/4-mile distance, and the pageantry and madness of the day itself, just add more uncertainty to the mix.
All that said, for those of us who still plan to bet on the Kentucky Derby, I think Quality Road is the real deal. At the moment, it looks like there may not be a lot of early pace signed on for the Derby (this assessment is subject to revision, of course), and QR has proven versatility in either going to the front or sitting just off the early leaders. The recent quarter crack that caused him to miss some training is a concern, but I think there's plenty of time left before Saturday, May 2 for Jerkens to get him right.
Now back to our regularly scheduled programming.
Thursday, April 9, 2009
If I understand the rules correctly, I'll be one of 300 contestants on Saturday, which is a "Round 1" event. The goal is to finish in the top 30, which moves you on to Round 2, to be held on the last Saturday of the month. Assuming 90 players in Round 2 (30 from each of the three Round 1 contests), the top 9 then qualify for Vegas. So the percentages seem reasonable enough, but of course, making the top 10% in two consecutive contests is much easier said than done.
Of Saturday's 10 contest races, 6 are from Keeneland and 4 are from Santa Anita. I've not developed any real feel for the synthetic KEE surface, and I never have followed California racing closely, so I will need more than my share of luck. The format (1 mythical $2WP bet on each race, odds capped at 20-1 on win and 10-1 on place) will also be new to me, as the NJ contests I have played offer more leeway on wager size and do not cap odds.
At any rate, all that stuff is noise really, my focus on Saturday is to be in the top 30 after Santa Anita's 7th race is made official. This will require some good handicapping, and some better-than-good luck.
I'm hoping to live-blog my contest experience in some way, shape or form on Saturday.
Monday, March 9, 2009
A revised contest schedule is now up on the NTRA site. It seems the biggest change is the addition of four "super" qualifiers, offering a combined 21 spots out to the Red Rock next January. For this New Jersey-based NHC Tour member, the good news is that the August 29 super event will be held at Monmouth Park. The bad news is that these "super" qualifiers apparently call for "super" antes -- the Monmouth contest is a $600 affair, quite a bit more than than the usual contest price tags of $100-$400.
Six Benjies is definitely high in absolute terms, but it does send six to Vegas, so it actually sounds pretty decent in terms of qualifying bang-for-the-buck. Depending on how my finances shape up heading into the day, I may well give it a try.
For now, I'll focus on much-cheaper ($100) NHCQualify.com contest next month, and then the next free NHC Tour online event on Kentucky Derby day.
Sunday, March 1, 2009
My winning bets were $20W on Ghost Hour (paid $13) at Gulfstream; $10W on No Questions ($13.80) at Aqueduct, and $50W on Barrier Reef ($6.40) at Aqueduct. The winners increased my $100 starting bankroll to $200, $259, and then the high-water mark of the day, $329. They also put me on the contest leaderboard, mostly bouncing around between 12th and 24th place (of 237 participants) -- not half bad.
But the wheels fell off late. $329 wasn't gonna get me in the Top 10 -- needed at least $600-$650 for that, as of the last standings I saw -- so I had to take some shots to try to punch my way in. So, I played
-$30W on Senor Freddie (~15-1) in the Aqu finale. It was a speculative play but closers had been sucking up speed all day and this horse looked like he could come from the clouds. Alas, he didn't do much of anything.
-$40W on Rogue Victory (~8-1) in the Canadian Turf Handicap. Was stepping up in class but I thought perhaps he could manage a rail-skimming trip and prove good enough. He did make a run around the far turn, but got fanned wide and never really fired in the lane.
-$50W on Beethoven (~5-1) in the FOY. Got ran off his feet early and fell too damn far back, and could rally only for 3rd. No regrets here, as my second choice in this race was Break Water Edison, who didn't even finish.
-$40W on Our Ace (~10-1) in the Tampa finale. Looked in decent shape while gaining around the turn but flattened out late. I don't follow Tampa at all so this was admittedly a stab, one I never would have made on a non-contest day, but it was another chance to get in the Top 10 so I had to take it. And lastly,
-$150W(!) on first-timer Virsito (~5-1), in the GP finale. This was a full field of mostly first-time starters going a mile on the grass, so it was tough to be real confident about what the outcome would be, but I did think Virsito was the most likely winner. Nice pedigree, favorable post, the Goldberg-Marquez connections had at least one other debut winner at the meet, and the tote board said he was live (bet down from 8-1 ML). Turned out none of that meant anything, as the horse really didn't pick up his feet and finished 7th.
I was out the door after that, and my once-mighty betting card got me back less than $20.
What lessons can be learned? You know, I can't really think of any. Other post-contest times I thought maybe I had been overly aggressive, or bet the wrong horse, or didn't bet enough, etc. This time, I really think I did right by contest strategy. After all, all you can ask for is to be in the thick of things late in the afternoon, and I was. I took FIVE shots after my bankroll had reached $329, any ONE of which would most likely have punched me into the Top 10, but nothing came through. I have to think that next time, maybe one (or heavens, even two?) will come through.
P.S. Nothing doing in the NHC contest, where I tied for 357th or something, a midpack finish.
Friday, February 27, 2009
My focus will be on the Monmouth contest, with the goal of finishing in the top 10 of an estimated field of 200 (being that this is the last SSC of the season, the previous SSC attracted more than 200 players, and tomorrow's weather is supposed to be decent, I suspect more than 200 will show). This would qualify me for a 30-person invitational contest in April, where the top 2 finishers go to Vegas next January.
I will make picks in advance for the online contest, possibly revising here and there over the course of the day if I'm able to, but I'm not putting many eggs into this basket. Only the top 2 qualify, out of a guesstimated field of 800ish. 2-of-800 is much less attractive than 10-of-200, so the latter proposition is where I'll devote my mental energy.
I won't get into specific horses, not for any competitive reason or anything, but rather because I haven't really reviewed the races yet. After a couple recent early flush-outs, I am thinking I may try to be a little more patient earlier in the contest, so I have a better chance of still being kicking around late in the afternoon.
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Aside from the considerations I outlined in my previous post, I'm thinking that even if I don't get anywhere on the NHC tour, membership can end up saving me money. This is because on the five free-contest days over the course of the year, I will be able to not go to the track in person and still catch some Saturday racing action. Being that my in-person track trips are more likely to put a hole in, rather than stuff, my wallet, even 1 or 2 non-trips can save me back more than the $125 tour outlay.
And plus, membership gets me a NHC Tour T-shirt, which I wasn't aware of until I signed up. Howza bout that!
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
I'm definitely intent on making it out to Vegas next January (heck, I have a blog dedicated to the quest), so the decision could appear to be a no-brainer. But as I've previously indicated, discretionary funds are not unlimited, so I want to carefully vet each dollar spent for what chance it gives me to qualify. In other words, if there's a $100 contest in my backyard that qualifies 3 of 100, sign me up; if there's a $400 contest across the country that qualifies 1 of 300, I'll pass.
It costs $125 to join the NHC Tour. As I see it, the primary benefit is the five online contests free to Tour members over the course of the year, which offer a total of nine spots to Vegas. The NTRA's Fritz Widaman told me there were about 800 or 900 (he said one or the other, I just forget which) in the Tour last year, and he expects 1,000 or so this year. So, $125 for a chance to be one of 9 qualifiers out of 1,000 isn't bad, as far as contest probabilities go.
Tour members also earn points based on contest placings, and it looks like the top six in the final standings also go to Vegas in 2010. I personally don't see much value to this qualifying route, though, as it clearly favors more regular players with deeper bankrolls. Final points are determined based on a player's top-five finishes, not just cumulative points, but still, you're much more likely to show a strong top five if you played in 30 contests rather than 10.
There's also a $2 million bonus awarded if the NHC winner is an NHC Tour member. This is kind of an abstract concept to someone who's scratching and clawing just to get in the tourney, let alone win it....but still, wouldn't that be a pisser if missed out on the two mil because I was too cheap to buck up $125?
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
So I have no post-contest sob story to offer up, nor can I regale my loyal readership with a proud and dramatic tale of victory.
But I always look forward to seeing the results, as there are usually some insights to be gleaned. As the Monmouth Park link shows, Jim Wasserson of Washington Crossing, PA beat 212 rivals with a final bankroll of $920. Ricky Zimmer finished second with $682.90.
A couple observations:
1. I am surprised that Monmouth attracted 213 players in these tough economic times. Usually these winter contests seem to get 160-180 or thereabouts -- I'd have figured if anything Saturday's number would be lower, with presumably fewer people willing to ante up $200. I guess the strong attendance is a testament to the growing popularity of handicapping contests generally, and Monmouth's continued capable management of their contests specifically. In fact, I daresay that in this era of declining attendance, field size, and caliber of horseflesh at the Oceanport Oval, the handicapping contest program is the track's one growth area.
2. I am not surprised at the $920 and $682.90 1-2 finishers, which are quite low bankrolls by historical contest standards. With a full field of 213, usually you need at least $1,500 to have a shot at winning, and I've seen $2K-$4K winners. I think prices tell the tale as to why nobody cracked four figures.
Aqueduct, which I suspect is the most-bet track in the contest, was ridiculously chalky on Saturday -- aside from the $16.40 first-race winner, the other 8 winners paid between $2.90 and $6.50. Tampa was not much better -- one 54-1 bomb came in, but 8 of the other 10 winners paid less than $9. Gulfstream had several prices in the $16-$20 range, but apparently no more than a few contest participants put more than one of them together with any firepower.
Risk taking is what wins handicapping contests, but when chalk rules the day like it (mostly) did on Saturday, risk taking is punished.
At any rate, I am looking forward to the Simulcast Series Challenge #3 on February 28 at Monmouth. I imagine it will be a large field given last week's attendance and the fact that this will be the last qualifier for the invitational contest in April.
Thursday, February 5, 2009
But realistically, a bankruptcy filing would be a capital-structure reorganization to get Station Casinos out from under its massive debt load and should not have any meaningful impact on the day-to-day operations of the facility. In the service industry, any competent management team knows that cutbacks are dangerous and can quickly lead to a no-return downward spiral in revenue. Who knows, the potential bankruptcy is supposed to be a "prepackaged" arrangement, which typically moves quicker than an out-of-the-blue filing, so Station Casinos may well have already emerged from bankruptcy come next January.
So while my fears of the Red Rock deteriorating into a roach motel were stated tongue-in-cheek, the turn of events goes to show how times have changed. As the Wall Street Journal reported, just a couple years ago Station Casinos sought to "carry out ambitious expansion plans to upgrade its profile from middling casinos for Las Vegas locals, to luxury properties that lured out-of-towners." Surely, landing the NHC was part of those expansion plans -- wonder if either side will have qualms about renewing the deal when the time comes.
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
I did take a crack at the Jan. 17 pre-qualifier at Monmouth, with no luck (I realize this is old news by now, but being as this blog didn't exist then, I figure it's worth a quick recap). I had $30W on an 8-1 horse on the Tampa turf that led all the way before being caught late by a 17-1 shot, which would have put me in the early-afternoon top 5, but nothing doing beyond that -- 4 losing bets and I was out the door.
I was amazed several days later when I read that the contest winner was down to his last $10 before parlaying 7-1 and 23-1 winners in the final two races at Gulfstream. I usually feel hopelessly behind the eight-ball when my $100 bankroll is down to $30 or $40 (at which time the leader may have $400 or somesuch). If I have $10 left, I'm pretty much putting on my jacket. Indeed, Nick Fazzolari's win was no mean feat: by my back-of-the-envelope calculations, the odds of hitting back-to-back 7-1 and 23-1 winners are approximately 1 in 192 (1/8 x 1/24).
Just goes to show that you always have a puncher's chance in handicapping contests, or at least those with no max bet.
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
I have a...er...um..."mixed" (to put it graciously) record so far in handicapping contests. I have probably entered 20 or so contests over the past five years, mostly at Monmouth Park, with buy-ins ranging from $50 to $300. I finished 10th one time a few years ago, my only prize-money placing. Several other times I've been on the leaderboard, once as high as 3rd of almost 200, only to crap out by day's end. The other times I finished off the board, either breaking evenish or (more often) going bust.
But I have confidence my day will come, for a few reasons:
1. I like longshots, I think I'm decent at finding live longshots, and I'm not afraid to play aggressively when I find them. This formula will bounce me out of most contests early, but on days when I'm on, it gives me a real chance.
2. While I see more than a few familiar faces on the NJ contest circuit, the names in the top 10 are almost always different. That tells me that even the best handicappers finish off the board in these contests much more frequently than they finish on the board. Good handicapping is important, but so are persistence and luck.
3. Recap articles often describe the contest winner as a frequent or semi-frequent player, but a first-time winner. So prior to winning, those folks were in the same classification I'm in now. Persistence pays off.
4. Ron Rippey of the Newark Star-Ledger not only qualified for the contest in 2006, but he WON the whole damn thing! He's been around for a long time and is an established and respected handicapper, but I find his published picks generally on the chalky and conservative side, with boring, odds-on "best bets". So if Rippey can win the NHC, it tells me there is no magic formula to break through other than solid handicapping, judicious risk taking, and a big ol' dollop of luck.
There are constraints to my quest to qualify for the NHC. First and foremost, antes. Unfortunately, contests can be expensive to enter, contests can be expensive to travel to (I can cheaply get to Monmouth, The Meadowlands, Belmont, and Aqueduct), and my discretionary funds are hardly unlimited. Internet qualifiers can be cheap or even free, but such contests are generally poor "lottery ticket" propositions, with maybe one NHC spot for 1,000+ contestants. So needless to say, I will have to pick my spots carefully.
Add it all up and I hope to make this a fun and interesting narrative of my attempts to qualify for the 2010 NHC. Wish me luck!