Patriots Coach Belichick Would Be An Excellent Horseplayer
Jan 28, 2015 1:54:54 GMT -5
Post by Jon on Jan 28, 2015 1:54:54 GMT -5
Well - Bill has the straight face lying down oat. If the weather was the problem with the balls, why didn't it affect the balls the Colts used? LOL
Towers: Patriots Coach Bill Belichick Would Be An Excellent Horseplayer
by Dean Towers
from Paulick Report
This article originally appeared in the “Horseplayer Monthly,” a free e-magazine produced by the Horseplayers Association of North America. If you’d like to sign up to have it delivered free each month in your inbox, or to read back issues, please visit the Horseplayer Monthly page here.
With the Super Bowl just days away, the media buzz has not been focused on the matchup between the New England Patriots and Seattle Seahawks. As most have heard, “DeflateGate” – the great deflated ball caper – has been dominating the news. At the epicenter of the controversy is Patriots head coach Bill Belichick.
Belichick has long been regarded as a good coach who might play with the rules on occasion but definitely does some unconventional things. Not only has he been reprimanded in the past for “Spygate,” he has also bucked convention with on-field decisions that make old-time coaches, most fans, and football historians wonder just what he might be thinking.
The best example of that may have been a few of years ago in a big game against the Indianapolis Colts. The Patriots were on their own 28 yard line with 2:08 to play, they were up 34 to 28, and it was 4th down and two. That would make for an easy decision, one may guess; you punt. But Belichick didn’t punt — he went for it.
Unfortunately for Belichick and the Patriots, this seemingly brazen move backfired; the Indianapolis defense stuffed them. Two minutes later, the Colts converted and the Patriots lost 35 to 34.
The news media and fans, both during and after the game, wanted Belichick’s head on a stick. How could a coach who is supposedly so smart, be so stupid? You punt in that situation; it’s not even debatable.
It turns out Belichick was not acting brazenly stupid; he was just playing the odds. In that situation, with hundreds of thousands of simulations, the play was to go for it because you’d win more often if you did. A supercomputer named “Zeus” at Boston University confirmed it. Belichick was doing the right thing because he wasn’t playing a gut feeling; he had access to and was playing the numbers.
Even with that piece of information, most sports writers, fans, and commentators failed to believe it. Going for it in your own end just seems so wrong, so against convention, so against what we’ve always been taught in football, that is has to be wrong.
As horseplayers, we fight similar feelings each day. A lot of us learn handicapping at a young age, and the things we learn – the “rules” – stick with us. We’re not sure they’re true, but they sound like they are. We’ve seen it happen, our friends talked about it, we read it in a handicapping book, or saw an analyst talk about it on a simulcast screen and we’ve cashed some tickets, too. It’s our “gut feel” and it has to be right.
Sometimes it isn’t.
I have a friend who will not bet rider Julien Leparoux if he is riding a speed horse on the turf. I think he saw him strangle a speed horse or two and said never again, or maybe because Leparoux is from across the pond, he must ride too patiently and should be a toss on speed. No matter the reason, he’s an “auto pitch” according to my friend. I don’t think he’s the only one who does that with Mr. Leparoux. On chat boards or on Twitter, I’ve seen the same quite often.
Bill Belichick might ask, “but is he really that bad?”
Leparoux, on the green in 2013, won 17% of the time and his ROI was a solid 0.95. With “e” or “ep” tagged horses – the speed – my friend may expect a bad number, but Mr. Leparoux clicked with 21% for an ROI of 1.10. With the top last race pace fig with a similar paceline in 2013, he won at 27.2% and possessed a sparkling ROI of 1.19. With horses on the green with Quirin speed points of over 5, he won at 27% and was also highly profitable.
So much for that theory, perhaps.
SIGN UP
LOGIN
<SCRIPT language='JavaScript1.1' SRC="https://ad.doubleclick.net/adj/N5688.290548.PAULICKREPORT.COM/B8447358.114435663;abr=!ie;sz=728x90;ord=[timestamp]?"> </SCRIPT> <NOSCRIPT> <a href="http://as1.paulickreport.com/www/delivery/ck.php?oaparams=2__bannerid=1901__zoneid=30__cb=7cf26acca1__oadest=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.tvg.com%2Fpage%2F2014Autumn1%3Fsrccode%3DPAU%26promocode%3DWIN125%26utm_medium%3Ddisplay%26utm_source%3DPaulickReport%26utm_campaign%3D2014Autumnhttps%3A%2F%2Fad.doubleclick.net%2Fjump%2FN5688.290548.PAULICKREPORT.COM%2FB8447358.114435663%3Babr%3D%21ie4%3Babr%3D%21ie5%3Bsz%3D728x90%3Bord%3D%5Btimestamp%5D%3F" target="_blank"> <IMG SRC="https://ad.doubleclick.net/ad/N5688.290548.PAULICKREPORT.COM/B8447358.114435663;abr=!ie4;abr=!ie5;sz=728x90;ord=[timestamp]?" BORDER=0 WIDTH=728 HEIGHT=90 ALT="Advertisement"></A> </NOSCRIPT>
NYbreds.com
Home
News
Features
Breeders’ Cup
Videos
Ask Ray?
Contact
Fort Erie Adds Two Weeks, Set for 40-Day Meet in 2015
Towers: Patriots Coach Bill Belichick Would Be An Excellent Horseplayer
by Dean Towers | 01.27.2015 | 1:05pm
Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin
Share on stumbleupon
Share on tumblr
More Sharing Services
Share on email
Share on gmail
123Bet.com
Ask Ray
Belichick often flouts conventional wisdom in favor of riding with the numbers
Belichick often flouts conventional wisdom in favor of riding with the numbers
This article originally appeared in the “Horseplayer Monthly,” a free e-magazine produced by the Horseplayers Association of North America. If you’d like to sign up to have it delivered free each month in your inbox, or to read back issues, please visit the Horseplayer Monthly page here.
With the Super Bowl just days away, the media buzz has not been focused on the matchup between the New England Patriots and Seattle Seahawks. As most have heard, “DeflateGate” – the great deflated ball caper – has been dominating the news. At the epicenter of the controversy is Patriots head coach Bill Belichick.
Belichick has long been regarded as a good coach who might play with the rules on occasion but definitely does some unconventional things. Not only has he been reprimanded in the past for “Spygate,” he has also bucked convention with on-field decisions that make old-time coaches, most fans, and football historians wonder just what he might be thinking.
The best example of that may have been a few of years ago in a big game against the Indianapolis Colts. The Patriots were on their own 28 yard line with 2:08 to play, they were up 34 to 28, and it was 4th down and two. That would make for an easy decision, one may guess; you punt. But Belichick didn’t punt — he went for it.
Unfortunately for Belichick and the Patriots, this seemingly brazen move backfired; the Indianapolis defense stuffed them. Two minutes later, the Colts converted and the Patriots lost 35 to 34.
Shadwell Farm
The news media and fans, both during and after the game, wanted Belichick’s head on a stick. How could a coach who is supposedly so smart, be so stupid? You punt in that situation; it’s not even debatable.
It turns out Belichick was not acting brazenly stupid; he was just playing the odds. In that situation, with hundreds of thousands of simulations, the play was to go for it because you’d win more often if you did. A supercomputer named “Zeus” at Boston University confirmed it. Belichick was doing the right thing because he wasn’t playing a gut feeling; he had access to and was playing the numbers.
Even with that piece of information, most sports writers, fans, and commentators failed to believe it. Going for it in your own end just seems so wrong, so against convention, so against what we’ve always been taught in football, that is has to be wrong.
As horseplayers, we fight similar feelings each day. A lot of us learn handicapping at a young age, and the things we learn – the “rules” – stick with us. We’re not sure they’re true, but they sound like they are. We’ve seen it happen, our friends talked about it, we read it in a handicapping book, or saw an analyst talk about it on a simulcast screen and we’ve cashed some tickets, too. It’s our “gut feel” and it has to be right.
Sometimes it isn’t.
I have a friend who will not bet rider Julien Leparoux if he is riding a speed horse on the turf. I think he saw him strangle a speed horse or two and said never again, or maybe because Leparoux is from across the pond, he must ride too patiently and should be a toss on speed. No matter the reason, he’s an “auto pitch” according to my friend. I don’t think he’s the only one who does that with Mr. Leparoux. On chat boards or on Twitter, I’ve seen the same quite often.
Bill Belichick might ask, “but is he really that bad?”
Leparoux, on the green in 2013, won 17% of the time and his ROI was a solid 0.95. With “e” or “ep” tagged horses – the speed – my friend may expect a bad number, but Mr. Leparoux clicked with 21% for an ROI of 1.10. With the top last race pace fig with a similar paceline in 2013, he won at 27.2% and possessed a sparkling ROI of 1.19. With horses on the green with Quirin speed points of over 5, he won at 27% and was also highly profitable.
So much for that theory, perhaps.
SIGN UP
LOGIN
<SCRIPT language='JavaScript1.1' SRC="https://ad.doubleclick.net/adj/N5688.290548.PAULICKREPORT.COM/B8447358.114435663;abr=!ie;sz=728x90;ord=[timestamp]?"> </SCRIPT> <NOSCRIPT> <a href="http://as1.paulickreport.com/www/delivery/ck.php?oaparams=2__bannerid=1901__zoneid=30__cb=7cf26acca1__oadest=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.tvg.com%2Fpage%2F2014Autumn1%3Fsrccode%3DPAU%26promocode%3DWIN125%26utm_medium%3Ddisplay%26utm_source%3DPaulickReport%26utm_campaign%3D2014Autumnhttps%3A%2F%2Fad.doubleclick.net%2Fjump%2FN5688.290548.PAULICKREPORT.COM%2FB8447358.114435663%3Babr%3D%21ie4%3Babr%3D%21ie5%3Bsz%3D728x90%3Bord%3D%5Btimestamp%5D%3F" target="_blank"> <IMG SRC="https://ad.doubleclick.net/ad/N5688.290548.PAULICKREPORT.COM/B8447358.114435663;abr=!ie4;abr=!ie5;sz=728x90;ord=[timestamp]?" BORDER=0 WIDTH=728 HEIGHT=90 ALT="Advertisement"></A> </NOSCRIPT>
NYbreds.com
Home
News
Features
Breeders’ Cup
Videos
Ask Ray?
Contact
Fort Erie Adds Two Weeks, Set for 40-Day Meet in 2015
Towers: Patriots Coach Bill Belichick Would Be An Excellent Horseplayer
by Dean Towers | 01.27.2015 | 1:05pm
Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin
Share on stumbleupon
Share on tumblr
More Sharing Services
Share on email
Share on gmail
123Bet.com
Ask Ray
Belichick often flouts conventional wisdom in favor of riding with the numbers
Belichick often flouts conventional wisdom in favor of riding with the numbers
This article originally appeared in the “Horseplayer Monthly,” a free e-magazine produced by the Horseplayers Association of North America. If you’d like to sign up to have it delivered free each month in your inbox, or to read back issues, please visit the Horseplayer Monthly page here.
With the Super Bowl just days away, the media buzz has not been focused on the matchup between the New England Patriots and Seattle Seahawks. As most have heard, “DeflateGate” – the great deflated ball caper – has been dominating the news. At the epicenter of the controversy is Patriots head coach Bill Belichick.
Belichick has long been regarded as a good coach who might play with the rules on occasion but definitely does some unconventional things. Not only has he been reprimanded in the past for “Spygate,” he has also bucked convention with on-field decisions that make old-time coaches, most fans, and football historians wonder just what he might be thinking.
The best example of that may have been a few of years ago in a big game against the Indianapolis Colts. The Patriots were on their own 28 yard line with 2:08 to play, they were up 34 to 28, and it was 4th down and two. That would make for an easy decision, one may guess; you punt. But Belichick didn’t punt — he went for it.
Unfortunately for Belichick and the Patriots, this seemingly brazen move backfired; the Indianapolis defense stuffed them. Two minutes later, the Colts converted and the Patriots lost 35 to 34.
Shadwell Farm
The news media and fans, both during and after the game, wanted Belichick’s head on a stick. How could a coach who is supposedly so smart, be so stupid? You punt in that situation; it’s not even debatable.
It turns out Belichick was not acting brazenly stupid; he was just playing the odds. In that situation, with hundreds of thousands of simulations, the play was to go for it because you’d win more often if you did. A supercomputer named “Zeus” at Boston University confirmed it. Belichick was doing the right thing because he wasn’t playing a gut feeling; he had access to and was playing the numbers.
Even with that piece of information, most sports writers, fans, and commentators failed to believe it. Going for it in your own end just seems so wrong, so against convention, so against what we’ve always been taught in football, that is has to be wrong.
As horseplayers, we fight similar feelings each day. A lot of us learn handicapping at a young age, and the things we learn – the “rules” – stick with us. We’re not sure they’re true, but they sound like they are. We’ve seen it happen, our friends talked about it, we read it in a handicapping book, or saw an analyst talk about it on a simulcast screen and we’ve cashed some tickets, too. It’s our “gut feel” and it has to be right.
Sometimes it isn’t.
I have a friend who will not bet rider Julien Leparoux if he is riding a speed horse on the turf. I think he saw him strangle a speed horse or two and said never again, or maybe because Leparoux is from across the pond, he must ride too patiently and should be a toss on speed. No matter the reason, he’s an “auto pitch” according to my friend. I don’t think he’s the only one who does that with Mr. Leparoux. On chat boards or on Twitter, I’ve seen the same quite often.
Bill Belichick might ask, “but is he really that bad?”
Leparoux, on the green in 2013, won 17% of the time and his ROI was a solid 0.95. With “e” or “ep” tagged horses – the speed – my friend may expect a bad number, but Mr. Leparoux clicked with 21% for an ROI of 1.10. With the top last race pace fig with a similar paceline in 2013, he won at 27.2% and possessed a sparkling ROI of 1.19. With horses on the green with Quirin speed points of over 5, he won at 27% and was also highly profitable.
So much for that theory, perhaps.
We all want to see some sort of recency in works for a horse that has been off a little while. One friend fades pretty much every horse off three weeks or more without a work. That is not going out on a limb and makes perfect sense. In fact, the numbers bear this out. In 2013, horses off no work and off 25 days or more had a lower impact value than those who were worked.
One day we were discussing the third race at Belmont where trainer David Jacobson had a horse off 28 days with no works. The horse was 5-2. “I think he is not hitting the board” said my friend, as he walked to the virtual betting window to toss him out. Unfortunately for him, the horse ended up winning easily.
It turns out that conventional wisdom does not work with some trainers, and David Jacobson is one of them. With no works, off 25 or more days, he’s hit with 7 of 22 starters for 31% (for about a flat ROI). His win percentage with all horses is around 24%. In a common sense situation where we should look elsewhere – in Belichick parlance, we should “punt” – we should actually be sitting the race out or maybe keying the horse in exotics.
Starters off extended layoffs is another fade for many handicappers. In the 1970’s and beyond, these horses that are at times coming back off huge problems, had a terrible win rate. They were the quintessential “auto pitch.” In modern horse racing, they are still poor and win at a rate that is worse than average, but if they have a bullet work and a properly spaced work tab, horses off 300 or more days in 2013, had a 0.992 ROI and won 17% of the time. For some trainers, betting them can be extremely profitable.
Bill Belichick is a good coach and one of the reasons he is a good coach is that he is unafraid to buck convention, when bucking convention has some type of validity. Handicappers like me and you are playing against other handicappers – this game is “pari-mutuel” – and if other handicappers are all doing the same thing, it does not mean it’s necessarily correct. We need to be skeptical, yet wary; respectful of wisdom, yet curious. By channeling our inner Bill Belichick we can become better and more profitable horseplayers.
Towers: Patriots Coach Bill Belichick Would Be An Excellent Horseplayer
by Dean Towers
from Paulick Report
This article originally appeared in the “Horseplayer Monthly,” a free e-magazine produced by the Horseplayers Association of North America. If you’d like to sign up to have it delivered free each month in your inbox, or to read back issues, please visit the Horseplayer Monthly page here.
With the Super Bowl just days away, the media buzz has not been focused on the matchup between the New England Patriots and Seattle Seahawks. As most have heard, “DeflateGate” – the great deflated ball caper – has been dominating the news. At the epicenter of the controversy is Patriots head coach Bill Belichick.
Belichick has long been regarded as a good coach who might play with the rules on occasion but definitely does some unconventional things. Not only has he been reprimanded in the past for “Spygate,” he has also bucked convention with on-field decisions that make old-time coaches, most fans, and football historians wonder just what he might be thinking.
The best example of that may have been a few of years ago in a big game against the Indianapolis Colts. The Patriots were on their own 28 yard line with 2:08 to play, they were up 34 to 28, and it was 4th down and two. That would make for an easy decision, one may guess; you punt. But Belichick didn’t punt — he went for it.
Unfortunately for Belichick and the Patriots, this seemingly brazen move backfired; the Indianapolis defense stuffed them. Two minutes later, the Colts converted and the Patriots lost 35 to 34.
The news media and fans, both during and after the game, wanted Belichick’s head on a stick. How could a coach who is supposedly so smart, be so stupid? You punt in that situation; it’s not even debatable.
It turns out Belichick was not acting brazenly stupid; he was just playing the odds. In that situation, with hundreds of thousands of simulations, the play was to go for it because you’d win more often if you did. A supercomputer named “Zeus” at Boston University confirmed it. Belichick was doing the right thing because he wasn’t playing a gut feeling; he had access to and was playing the numbers.
Even with that piece of information, most sports writers, fans, and commentators failed to believe it. Going for it in your own end just seems so wrong, so against convention, so against what we’ve always been taught in football, that is has to be wrong.
As horseplayers, we fight similar feelings each day. A lot of us learn handicapping at a young age, and the things we learn – the “rules” – stick with us. We’re not sure they’re true, but they sound like they are. We’ve seen it happen, our friends talked about it, we read it in a handicapping book, or saw an analyst talk about it on a simulcast screen and we’ve cashed some tickets, too. It’s our “gut feel” and it has to be right.
Sometimes it isn’t.
I have a friend who will not bet rider Julien Leparoux if he is riding a speed horse on the turf. I think he saw him strangle a speed horse or two and said never again, or maybe because Leparoux is from across the pond, he must ride too patiently and should be a toss on speed. No matter the reason, he’s an “auto pitch” according to my friend. I don’t think he’s the only one who does that with Mr. Leparoux. On chat boards or on Twitter, I’ve seen the same quite often.
Bill Belichick might ask, “but is he really that bad?”
Leparoux, on the green in 2013, won 17% of the time and his ROI was a solid 0.95. With “e” or “ep” tagged horses – the speed – my friend may expect a bad number, but Mr. Leparoux clicked with 21% for an ROI of 1.10. With the top last race pace fig with a similar paceline in 2013, he won at 27.2% and possessed a sparkling ROI of 1.19. With horses on the green with Quirin speed points of over 5, he won at 27% and was also highly profitable.
So much for that theory, perhaps.
SIGN UP
LOGIN
<SCRIPT language='JavaScript1.1' SRC="https://ad.doubleclick.net/adj/N5688.290548.PAULICKREPORT.COM/B8447358.114435663;abr=!ie;sz=728x90;ord=[timestamp]?"> </SCRIPT> <NOSCRIPT> <a href="http://as1.paulickreport.com/www/delivery/ck.php?oaparams=2__bannerid=1901__zoneid=30__cb=7cf26acca1__oadest=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.tvg.com%2Fpage%2F2014Autumn1%3Fsrccode%3DPAU%26promocode%3DWIN125%26utm_medium%3Ddisplay%26utm_source%3DPaulickReport%26utm_campaign%3D2014Autumnhttps%3A%2F%2Fad.doubleclick.net%2Fjump%2FN5688.290548.PAULICKREPORT.COM%2FB8447358.114435663%3Babr%3D%21ie4%3Babr%3D%21ie5%3Bsz%3D728x90%3Bord%3D%5Btimestamp%5D%3F" target="_blank"> <IMG SRC="https://ad.doubleclick.net/ad/N5688.290548.PAULICKREPORT.COM/B8447358.114435663;abr=!ie4;abr=!ie5;sz=728x90;ord=[timestamp]?" BORDER=0 WIDTH=728 HEIGHT=90 ALT="Advertisement"></A> </NOSCRIPT>
NYbreds.com
Home
News
Features
Breeders’ Cup
Videos
Ask Ray?
Contact
Fort Erie Adds Two Weeks, Set for 40-Day Meet in 2015
Towers: Patriots Coach Bill Belichick Would Be An Excellent Horseplayer
by Dean Towers | 01.27.2015 | 1:05pm
Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin
Share on stumbleupon
Share on tumblr
More Sharing Services
Share on email
Share on gmail
123Bet.com
Ask Ray
Belichick often flouts conventional wisdom in favor of riding with the numbers
Belichick often flouts conventional wisdom in favor of riding with the numbers
This article originally appeared in the “Horseplayer Monthly,” a free e-magazine produced by the Horseplayers Association of North America. If you’d like to sign up to have it delivered free each month in your inbox, or to read back issues, please visit the Horseplayer Monthly page here.
With the Super Bowl just days away, the media buzz has not been focused on the matchup between the New England Patriots and Seattle Seahawks. As most have heard, “DeflateGate” – the great deflated ball caper – has been dominating the news. At the epicenter of the controversy is Patriots head coach Bill Belichick.
Belichick has long been regarded as a good coach who might play with the rules on occasion but definitely does some unconventional things. Not only has he been reprimanded in the past for “Spygate,” he has also bucked convention with on-field decisions that make old-time coaches, most fans, and football historians wonder just what he might be thinking.
The best example of that may have been a few of years ago in a big game against the Indianapolis Colts. The Patriots were on their own 28 yard line with 2:08 to play, they were up 34 to 28, and it was 4th down and two. That would make for an easy decision, one may guess; you punt. But Belichick didn’t punt — he went for it.
Unfortunately for Belichick and the Patriots, this seemingly brazen move backfired; the Indianapolis defense stuffed them. Two minutes later, the Colts converted and the Patriots lost 35 to 34.
Shadwell Farm
The news media and fans, both during and after the game, wanted Belichick’s head on a stick. How could a coach who is supposedly so smart, be so stupid? You punt in that situation; it’s not even debatable.
It turns out Belichick was not acting brazenly stupid; he was just playing the odds. In that situation, with hundreds of thousands of simulations, the play was to go for it because you’d win more often if you did. A supercomputer named “Zeus” at Boston University confirmed it. Belichick was doing the right thing because he wasn’t playing a gut feeling; he had access to and was playing the numbers.
Even with that piece of information, most sports writers, fans, and commentators failed to believe it. Going for it in your own end just seems so wrong, so against convention, so against what we’ve always been taught in football, that is has to be wrong.
As horseplayers, we fight similar feelings each day. A lot of us learn handicapping at a young age, and the things we learn – the “rules” – stick with us. We’re not sure they’re true, but they sound like they are. We’ve seen it happen, our friends talked about it, we read it in a handicapping book, or saw an analyst talk about it on a simulcast screen and we’ve cashed some tickets, too. It’s our “gut feel” and it has to be right.
Sometimes it isn’t.
I have a friend who will not bet rider Julien Leparoux if he is riding a speed horse on the turf. I think he saw him strangle a speed horse or two and said never again, or maybe because Leparoux is from across the pond, he must ride too patiently and should be a toss on speed. No matter the reason, he’s an “auto pitch” according to my friend. I don’t think he’s the only one who does that with Mr. Leparoux. On chat boards or on Twitter, I’ve seen the same quite often.
Bill Belichick might ask, “but is he really that bad?”
Leparoux, on the green in 2013, won 17% of the time and his ROI was a solid 0.95. With “e” or “ep” tagged horses – the speed – my friend may expect a bad number, but Mr. Leparoux clicked with 21% for an ROI of 1.10. With the top last race pace fig with a similar paceline in 2013, he won at 27.2% and possessed a sparkling ROI of 1.19. With horses on the green with Quirin speed points of over 5, he won at 27% and was also highly profitable.
So much for that theory, perhaps.
SIGN UP
LOGIN
<SCRIPT language='JavaScript1.1' SRC="https://ad.doubleclick.net/adj/N5688.290548.PAULICKREPORT.COM/B8447358.114435663;abr=!ie;sz=728x90;ord=[timestamp]?"> </SCRIPT> <NOSCRIPT> <a href="http://as1.paulickreport.com/www/delivery/ck.php?oaparams=2__bannerid=1901__zoneid=30__cb=7cf26acca1__oadest=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.tvg.com%2Fpage%2F2014Autumn1%3Fsrccode%3DPAU%26promocode%3DWIN125%26utm_medium%3Ddisplay%26utm_source%3DPaulickReport%26utm_campaign%3D2014Autumnhttps%3A%2F%2Fad.doubleclick.net%2Fjump%2FN5688.290548.PAULICKREPORT.COM%2FB8447358.114435663%3Babr%3D%21ie4%3Babr%3D%21ie5%3Bsz%3D728x90%3Bord%3D%5Btimestamp%5D%3F" target="_blank"> <IMG SRC="https://ad.doubleclick.net/ad/N5688.290548.PAULICKREPORT.COM/B8447358.114435663;abr=!ie4;abr=!ie5;sz=728x90;ord=[timestamp]?" BORDER=0 WIDTH=728 HEIGHT=90 ALT="Advertisement"></A> </NOSCRIPT>
NYbreds.com
Home
News
Features
Breeders’ Cup
Videos
Ask Ray?
Contact
Fort Erie Adds Two Weeks, Set for 40-Day Meet in 2015
Towers: Patriots Coach Bill Belichick Would Be An Excellent Horseplayer
by Dean Towers | 01.27.2015 | 1:05pm
Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin
Share on stumbleupon
Share on tumblr
More Sharing Services
Share on email
Share on gmail
123Bet.com
Ask Ray
Belichick often flouts conventional wisdom in favor of riding with the numbers
Belichick often flouts conventional wisdom in favor of riding with the numbers
This article originally appeared in the “Horseplayer Monthly,” a free e-magazine produced by the Horseplayers Association of North America. If you’d like to sign up to have it delivered free each month in your inbox, or to read back issues, please visit the Horseplayer Monthly page here.
With the Super Bowl just days away, the media buzz has not been focused on the matchup between the New England Patriots and Seattle Seahawks. As most have heard, “DeflateGate” – the great deflated ball caper – has been dominating the news. At the epicenter of the controversy is Patriots head coach Bill Belichick.
Belichick has long been regarded as a good coach who might play with the rules on occasion but definitely does some unconventional things. Not only has he been reprimanded in the past for “Spygate,” he has also bucked convention with on-field decisions that make old-time coaches, most fans, and football historians wonder just what he might be thinking.
The best example of that may have been a few of years ago in a big game against the Indianapolis Colts. The Patriots were on their own 28 yard line with 2:08 to play, they were up 34 to 28, and it was 4th down and two. That would make for an easy decision, one may guess; you punt. But Belichick didn’t punt — he went for it.
Unfortunately for Belichick and the Patriots, this seemingly brazen move backfired; the Indianapolis defense stuffed them. Two minutes later, the Colts converted and the Patriots lost 35 to 34.
Shadwell Farm
The news media and fans, both during and after the game, wanted Belichick’s head on a stick. How could a coach who is supposedly so smart, be so stupid? You punt in that situation; it’s not even debatable.
It turns out Belichick was not acting brazenly stupid; he was just playing the odds. In that situation, with hundreds of thousands of simulations, the play was to go for it because you’d win more often if you did. A supercomputer named “Zeus” at Boston University confirmed it. Belichick was doing the right thing because he wasn’t playing a gut feeling; he had access to and was playing the numbers.
Even with that piece of information, most sports writers, fans, and commentators failed to believe it. Going for it in your own end just seems so wrong, so against convention, so against what we’ve always been taught in football, that is has to be wrong.
As horseplayers, we fight similar feelings each day. A lot of us learn handicapping at a young age, and the things we learn – the “rules” – stick with us. We’re not sure they’re true, but they sound like they are. We’ve seen it happen, our friends talked about it, we read it in a handicapping book, or saw an analyst talk about it on a simulcast screen and we’ve cashed some tickets, too. It’s our “gut feel” and it has to be right.
Sometimes it isn’t.
I have a friend who will not bet rider Julien Leparoux if he is riding a speed horse on the turf. I think he saw him strangle a speed horse or two and said never again, or maybe because Leparoux is from across the pond, he must ride too patiently and should be a toss on speed. No matter the reason, he’s an “auto pitch” according to my friend. I don’t think he’s the only one who does that with Mr. Leparoux. On chat boards or on Twitter, I’ve seen the same quite often.
Bill Belichick might ask, “but is he really that bad?”
Leparoux, on the green in 2013, won 17% of the time and his ROI was a solid 0.95. With “e” or “ep” tagged horses – the speed – my friend may expect a bad number, but Mr. Leparoux clicked with 21% for an ROI of 1.10. With the top last race pace fig with a similar paceline in 2013, he won at 27.2% and possessed a sparkling ROI of 1.19. With horses on the green with Quirin speed points of over 5, he won at 27% and was also highly profitable.
So much for that theory, perhaps.
We all want to see some sort of recency in works for a horse that has been off a little while. One friend fades pretty much every horse off three weeks or more without a work. That is not going out on a limb and makes perfect sense. In fact, the numbers bear this out. In 2013, horses off no work and off 25 days or more had a lower impact value than those who were worked.
One day we were discussing the third race at Belmont where trainer David Jacobson had a horse off 28 days with no works. The horse was 5-2. “I think he is not hitting the board” said my friend, as he walked to the virtual betting window to toss him out. Unfortunately for him, the horse ended up winning easily.
It turns out that conventional wisdom does not work with some trainers, and David Jacobson is one of them. With no works, off 25 or more days, he’s hit with 7 of 22 starters for 31% (for about a flat ROI). His win percentage with all horses is around 24%. In a common sense situation where we should look elsewhere – in Belichick parlance, we should “punt” – we should actually be sitting the race out or maybe keying the horse in exotics.
Starters off extended layoffs is another fade for many handicappers. In the 1970’s and beyond, these horses that are at times coming back off huge problems, had a terrible win rate. They were the quintessential “auto pitch.” In modern horse racing, they are still poor and win at a rate that is worse than average, but if they have a bullet work and a properly spaced work tab, horses off 300 or more days in 2013, had a 0.992 ROI and won 17% of the time. For some trainers, betting them can be extremely profitable.
Bill Belichick is a good coach and one of the reasons he is a good coach is that he is unafraid to buck convention, when bucking convention has some type of validity. Handicappers like me and you are playing against other handicappers – this game is “pari-mutuel” – and if other handicappers are all doing the same thing, it does not mean it’s necessarily correct. We need to be skeptical, yet wary; respectful of wisdom, yet curious. By channeling our inner Bill Belichick we can become better and more profitable horseplayers.