Apr 072010
 

Race 1: 3rd Race Aqueduct

The contest started with this race, at 2pm EDT.

For each race, I summarized all my analysis in a Google doc. Here is the one for this race:

Sample Google doc for Race 1

(This doesn’t fit on the screen too well – <ctrl>-click (Mac) or right-mouse-click (Windows)  on the image to open in a new window.)

In this race my logical analysis pointed to two horses – #1A and #4 (“A” in ctdr [contender] column).#4 went off at 6-1 and #1A at 12-1, both very bettable odds for the contest. Both of them got a Targ CR of 3.5 for the ARVing, tied for 2nd, pretty good, though not the highest.

The overwhelming 2-to-5 favorite #2 I ranked a logical B, with comment “fav; hangs; ulay”, where “hangs” means he has a tendency to slow down quickly nearing the finish, a sign of a horse that lacks the will to win, and “ulay” means underlay, a horse not worth his odds, and certainly not a good bet in this contest, at such short odds. He got only a Targ CR of 2.5 in the ARVing.

The highest Targ CR went to #7, an 11-1 shot I did not like logically at all.
(Horses with strikethrough had been scratched.)

Based on all this, the best choice was either #1A or #4.  I preferred #4, because he figured to be in front early, whereas #1A comes from behind, and the advantage is usually with the front runner, depending on how the track is playing (“track bias”). Plus #4 just felt like a good bet, especially at his odds of 6-1.

Somehow, though, as post time approached, I got it in my head that #2 was the best “feeling” horse – I thought I felt my guidance nudging me to this horse. Even though he was a very short price, I thought it’d be good to start with a winner.

Alas.

#4 went to the front and stayed there throughout, winning easily by 2 lengths, paying $19.10 total for win and place. #2 did just get up to finish 2nd, paying $2.40. #1A was 4th and #7 last. (I was right about my logical comment on the later – “needs lead/won’t get” – he was behind #4 early, then tired to finish last.)

Initially I was crushed. Such a win could be one of the keys to winning the contest, and instead of being in front, I was now behind the others who had hit it.

But I determined not to let this bother me. I decided to have fun anyway, and learn from this mistake.

I learned that when I change in the heat of the moment, even if I think it’s my guidance, it often isn’t, it’s my ego getting in the way, wanting to guarantee a win, which is really focusing on the fear of losing – and that can only attract losing.

It is much better to focus ahead of time on listening to guidance – which I had done – and then following though on those picks, rather than letting anything influence me at the last moment, if it comes from a place of fear of losing.

In this case, my guidance was the one talking when I felt good about #4 as opposed to #1A. It was the ego interfering when I thought about #2.

So this race was a lesson learned, that’s all. It doesn’t take away from the fact that I am a Winner, it is just temporary.

ARV Feedback

A critical part of the ARV process is the Feedback session, in which you send emotion and information backward in time to the self making picks.
I follow Marty’s suggestion to print out the ARV photo associated with the winner, and mark it up, tracing out shapes, writing words, and feeling the positive emotions when I see matches with my ARV session sketch.

I am doing the feedback for the NHCQ Contest in real time, while I am writing these blog entries.
Here is the winning photo for this race, along with my sketch:

I am sure you can see the matches with the top and middle of my sketch.
I focused on these with high emotion, congratulating myself for the great matches!


11 more races to go.

Share
 Posted by at 1:35 pm

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.