Friday is for the Fillies, the Oaks has been around (under various names) for almost as long as the Kentucky Derby (in fact, the race numbers are the same).
The post draw was Monday, and again Mike Battaglia *snicker* set the ML odds.
Thoughts...
1. Out for a Spin (15-1) Irad Ortiz Jr. - She hit a monster number her last time out but my thinking here is that a replica of that race would be a stretch. Still, Ortiz is a solid jockey and Dallas Stewart has a way of messing things up with long-odds horses.
2. Chocolate Kisses (20-1) Tyler Gaffalione - Why do I like this horse? Because there are a ton of horses in this field who "need the lead" which could create a speed duel that's begging for a closer to come in and pick up the pieces from a tired field. I think Chocolate Kisses is the best closer in this group.
3. Lady Apple (20-1) Ricardo Santana Jr. - Pros: She's 3-3 this year and had a long rest from early racing in her 2YO career. Cons: Her best win is a Grade II and she's never faced horses of this caliber. I think she's a step or two too slow.
4. Bellafina (2-1) Flavien Prat. - The deserving favorite here could be tough to beat. BUT, she's not ran her best races at length and she DID lose over this track at last year's Breeder's Cup race. Still, she's looked GREAT leading up to the race. No way you can ignore her.
5. Flor de La Mar (20-1) Joel Rosario - Last time out she ran a spunky 2nd to Bellafina, but her best has been on fast, firm tracks. It's expected to rain on Friday at Churchill. If she wins it will be at a price, which IS something one rarely hears about a Baffert horse.
6. Positive Spirit (30-1) Manny Franco - She ran a turd of a race at the Fairgrounds, but surrounded that with two really good trips at the same distance. Her problem is the same as Lady Apple, she's never beaten horses of the caliber she's facing here.
7. Jaywalk (8-1) Javier Castellano - Stop me if you've heard this before: Talented 2YO wins like crazy and then comes back as a 3YO and can't replicate the form. That's Jaywalk. The good news is I think she'll take some action, driving up the price of better options.
8. Motion Emotion (15-1) Mike Smith - Speed horse, whose going to have to rely on Mike Smith to out tactic everyone else if she's to have a chance. Her best compliment has been that she's "gritty", something I don't like to play too heavily against G1 competition.
9. Liora (20-1) Channing Hill - IF it rains, you should not discount this horse who ran her best rain over Churchill when the track was sloppy. Channing Hill will be a popular jockey pick on "ladies' day"
10. Champagne Anyone (6-1) - Chris Landeros - A horse that likes to be up front and who has blossomed since acquiring blinkers. Could be a contender here, or at least someone whose going to press Bellafina for the lead.
11. Jeltrin (15-1) Luis Saez - Best win was the GII Davona Dale over a sputtering Jaywalk at Gulfsream. The bad news: That, and every other race she's ran, was a one-turn race. Not a fan of backing a horse their first time around 2 turns against a field as solid as this. Still, another horse that could push the pace.
12. Street Band (15-1) Sophie Doyle - Took advantage of Serengeti Empress her last time out to win the G2 Fair Ground Oaks, but the winner in that race had a medical excuse. It's unlikely all of the other horses will here. She's a closer, but I don't think she's as good as Chocolate Kisses.
13. Serengeti Empress (8-1) James Graham - Until her bleeding issues she looked almost unbeatable. IF trainer Tom Amoss has figured that out then she could potentially run a scorcher here. Ignore her at your peril.
14. Restless Rider (6-1) Brain Hernandez Jr. Lightly raced (only once) in her 3YO season this could be the sharp horse of the race. IF she keeps the form from her two year old season it could be one of the rare occasions where the sharps pick the winner.
AE Dunbar Road (5-1) Lightly raced (only two starts) but has shown promise and could be set to improve should she get in.
AE Point of Honor (30-1) Doubtful she gets in, but could be a pretty fantastic Filly Miler if she needs an alternate career path.
Tuesday, April 30, 2019
145th Kentucky Derby Post Draw and ML Odds (with thoughts)
They just finished the live stream of the post draw, and Mike Battaglia *snicker* issued the ML odds.
Here are the results and a few thoughts.
1. War of Will (30-1) Tyler Gafflione - Brutal post draw for a horse that needs to be on or near the front. If he gets squeezed back as the rail closes his path down early, it's over.
2. Tax (20-1) Junior Alvarado - Also not the best of post draws. He'll have to do something special to win this.
3. By My Standards (20-1) Gabriel Saez - Not the worst post draw for him, but I'm not a fan of closers in this crowded a field.
4. Gray Magician (50-1) Dreydan Van Dyke - Maybe you take a flyer because of the hot jock on board, but he's probably out-classed here.
5. Improbable (6-1) Irad Ortiz Jr. - It does hurt that he's going to be to the inside of Omaha Beach, but if he runs his race he's potentially the most talented of the lot. Ignore him at your peril.
6. Vakoma (20-1) Javier Castellano - He'll be my longshot pick but to be honest I'm not entirely confident given that we're likely to have a sloppy track.
7. Maximum Security (10-1) Gabriel Saez - Like many others, I'm not sure what to make of this horse. I'll probably include him in the bottom half of my exotics but I don't think he's good enough to win.
8. Tacitus (10-1) Jose Ortiz - He's a contender, and is ridden by the current top jock in the US. He'll play in both my horizontals and my vertical wagers.
9. Plus Que Parfait (30-1) Ricardo Santana - Tossing him out. I just don't think he's fast enough to compete here.
10. Cutting Humor (30-1) Corey Lanarie - At most, a bottom of the verticals play.
11. Haikal (30-1) Rajiv Maragh - Good horse, good post position, will need to improve to stay with the best of the best here, but not out of hand if you're looking for a longshot. Could be the "sharp" horse in this race however which might make him too low to play.
12 Omaha Beach (4-1) Mike Smith - What many believe is the best horse in this race has the best big race jockey and great post. You can bet against him, but I wouldn't.
13. Code of Honor (15-1) John Velasquez - I don't love this spot for him, but I do like him being outside of Omaha Beach which means Johnny V can stalk if he so chooses.
14. Win Win Win (15-1) Julien Pimentel - I think Battaglia put this horse too high. The post draw isn't bad but he's going to have to work to avoid massive trip trouble.
15. Master Fencer (50-1) Julien Leparoux - Good story, the first Japanese bred horse granted entry to the Derby. Pretty horse, will ultimately be just too slow. Draw a line through him.
16. Game Winner (5-1) Joel Rosario - The 2 year old champion feels a little bit like last year's 2YO champion who won the Breeder's Juvenile, and then never progressed. I'll use him in my exotics however.
17. Roadster (6-1) Florent Giroux - Not the best post for him, and a post that's never won (0-44) but if any horse can win from here it's the third Baffert horse in the race. In the end though I think he has trip trouble and this becomes a "what if" face for him.
18. Long Range Toddy (30-1) John Court - Good to see Court get a Derby mount, might not be such a good result but you never know.
19. Spinoff (30-1) Manny Franco - If Franco gets this horse a good trip through 19 other horses, given his lack of early speed, it would be the ride of the year.
20. Country House (30-1) Flavien Prat - Seemingly a horse with more hype than ability, I just can't seem him starting way out here and competing.
AE Bodexpress (30-1) Chris Landeros - IF he gets in I wouldn't use him. Has nothing in his past that suggests he's a KY Derby caliber horse.
Here are the results and a few thoughts.
1. War of Will (30-1) Tyler Gafflione - Brutal post draw for a horse that needs to be on or near the front. If he gets squeezed back as the rail closes his path down early, it's over.
2. Tax (20-1) Junior Alvarado - Also not the best of post draws. He'll have to do something special to win this.
3. By My Standards (20-1) Gabriel Saez - Not the worst post draw for him, but I'm not a fan of closers in this crowded a field.
4. Gray Magician (50-1) Dreydan Van Dyke - Maybe you take a flyer because of the hot jock on board, but he's probably out-classed here.
5. Improbable (6-1) Irad Ortiz Jr. - It does hurt that he's going to be to the inside of Omaha Beach, but if he runs his race he's potentially the most talented of the lot. Ignore him at your peril.
6. Vakoma (20-1) Javier Castellano - He'll be my longshot pick but to be honest I'm not entirely confident given that we're likely to have a sloppy track.
7. Maximum Security (10-1) Gabriel Saez - Like many others, I'm not sure what to make of this horse. I'll probably include him in the bottom half of my exotics but I don't think he's good enough to win.
8. Tacitus (10-1) Jose Ortiz - He's a contender, and is ridden by the current top jock in the US. He'll play in both my horizontals and my vertical wagers.
9. Plus Que Parfait (30-1) Ricardo Santana - Tossing him out. I just don't think he's fast enough to compete here.
10. Cutting Humor (30-1) Corey Lanarie - At most, a bottom of the verticals play.
11. Haikal (30-1) Rajiv Maragh - Good horse, good post position, will need to improve to stay with the best of the best here, but not out of hand if you're looking for a longshot. Could be the "sharp" horse in this race however which might make him too low to play.
12 Omaha Beach (4-1) Mike Smith - What many believe is the best horse in this race has the best big race jockey and great post. You can bet against him, but I wouldn't.
13. Code of Honor (15-1) John Velasquez - I don't love this spot for him, but I do like him being outside of Omaha Beach which means Johnny V can stalk if he so chooses.
14. Win Win Win (15-1) Julien Pimentel - I think Battaglia put this horse too high. The post draw isn't bad but he's going to have to work to avoid massive trip trouble.
15. Master Fencer (50-1) Julien Leparoux - Good story, the first Japanese bred horse granted entry to the Derby. Pretty horse, will ultimately be just too slow. Draw a line through him.
16. Game Winner (5-1) Joel Rosario - The 2 year old champion feels a little bit like last year's 2YO champion who won the Breeder's Juvenile, and then never progressed. I'll use him in my exotics however.
17. Roadster (6-1) Florent Giroux - Not the best post for him, and a post that's never won (0-44) but if any horse can win from here it's the third Baffert horse in the race. In the end though I think he has trip trouble and this becomes a "what if" face for him.
18. Long Range Toddy (30-1) John Court - Good to see Court get a Derby mount, might not be such a good result but you never know.
19. Spinoff (30-1) Manny Franco - If Franco gets this horse a good trip through 19 other horses, given his lack of early speed, it would be the ride of the year.
20. Country House (30-1) Flavien Prat - Seemingly a horse with more hype than ability, I just can't seem him starting way out here and competing.
AE Bodexpress (30-1) Chris Landeros - IF he gets in I wouldn't use him. Has nothing in his past that suggests he's a KY Derby caliber horse.
Monday, April 22, 2019
NFL Draft: Pay No Attention to THIS YEAR's draft grades.
I love the NFL Draft. The anticipation, waiting for your team to pick, the reaction when your team finally makes said pick, pre-draft analysis of prospects. It's great.
I HATE what follows, the grading of a current class of NFL prospects prior to the draftees even putting on a uniform.
To illustrate the problems with this I present to you two "then and now" draft analysis from two teams. One team that I root for (The San Francisco 49ers) and one team that I follow and blog a lot about because I currently live in their city (The Houston Texans.)
The draft in question is the 2016 draft, which I use as an illustration because a.) It's three years in the past which has allowed ample time for the rookie class to shake out and b.) It's illustrative of just how many unknowns there really are in the draft process.
Let's start with the 49ers first.
Picks: (I'm using a 5.0 scale to grade players based on their performance in relation to their draft position etc. This is my scale, if you don't like it make your own.)
Round 1(7): DeForest Buckner - Oregon (DL) - Currently a starter and a player who's missed only two games since being drafted Buckner was a Pro Bowl invitee this year. That's pretty much what you want from your first pick in the draft. Grade: A 4.4/5.0
Round 1 (28): Joshua Garnett - Stanford (G) - Frequently injured Garnett is now a "depth" player who does not start. It's questionable how much longer he'll be on the team. You want better from a 1st round pic. Grade: D 1.5/5.0
Round 3 (68): Will Redmund - Mississippi State (CB) - Only spent one season with the team before being cut. Picked up by Green Bay and is currently a depth corner for them. Disappointing for a player many thought would help to build a base. Grade F 0.7/5.0
Round 4 (133): Rashard Robinson - LSU (CB) - Another player that is no longer on the roster, although he is still in the league, playing for the New York Jets. But you want starters in the 3rd round, if not stars. Grade: F 0.5/5.0
Round 5 (142) Ronald Blair III - Appalachian State (DL) - Has turned into a decent back-up/rotation DL for the team which is a pretty good return on a 5th round pick to be perfectly honest. Grade: B+ 3.8/5.0
Round 5 (145) John Theus - Georgia (OL) - Never made the team and never could pick up anywhere else in the league. Currently out of football. Grade: F 0.0/5.0
Round 5 (174) Fahn Cooper - Ole Miss (OL) Never made the team, never played a down, currently out of football. Grade: F 0.0/5.0
Round 6 (207) Jeff Driskel - Louisiana Tech (QB) - Never latched on with SF but is still in the league and played last year as a backup QB for Cincinnati. not too bad for a 6th round pick. But no help to the team itself. Grade: D+ 1.7/5.0
Round 6 (211) Kelvin Taylor - Florida (RB) - Another player who was expected to possibly contribute, but never played a down, and is currently out of the league. Grade: F 0.0/5.0
Round 6 (213) Aaron Burbridge - Michigan State (WR) - Still another "never made the team, never played a down in the NFL" player in this draft. Considering how high the draft was ranked that's unacceptable. Grade: F 0.0/5.0
Round 7 (249) Prince Charles Iworah - Western Kentucky (CB) - To be fair, he did appear in one regular season game, so that's some production. Giving him a flat zero would be unfair for a 7th round pick not projected to make the team (which he did). Grade: F 0.1/5.0
Original Draft Grade: B+
Revised Draft Grade: D- (12.7/55.0) or 1.1545 average points per player.
The thing is, after the 49ers completed this draft the praise could not be lathered on more deeply. Some in the NFL considered this to be a "foundation" draft full of players, from top to bottom, that would help the team from years to come. 3 years later and it feels like a lost draft class.
Next, lets look at the Texans
Round 1 (21) Will Fuller V - Notre Dame (WR) - Fuller has been hit and miss, with his highs being really good and his lows being injuries. Still, he's been a productive player who might grade higher were he able to be healthy more often. Grade: B- 3.2/5.0
Round 2 (50) Nick Martin - Notre Dame (C) - After sitting out his first year he's started every game for the team the last two and is just about the only thing on the Texans offensive line that doesn't need fixing. Good, solid player drafted in round 2, an oddity for this team. Grade: A- 4.2/5.0
Round 3 (85) Braxton Miller - Ohio State (WR) - At this point this pick was considered a possible steal, and while he was given a chance with the team, his potential never materialized and he was eventually cut and is currently out of football. Grade: D+ 1.1/5.0
Round 4 (113) Tyler Ervin - San Jose State (RB) - Mainly a special teams player and deep depth at RB. Still, when you consider his draft position that he's on the team means that he's living up to expectations. Grade: C 2.2/5.0
Round 5 (159) K J Dillon - West Virginia (SS) - Didn't make the team and is no longer in football. Usually the Texans make these types of picks in the 2nd and 3rd rounds. Grade: F 0.0/5.0
Round 5 (166) D J Reader - Clemson (DT) - Snagged via a trade up with the Patriots Reader has become a durable starting interior defensive lineman and is a solid contributor to the defense. That's pretty good return for that position. Grade: A+ 4.6/5.0
Original Draft Grade: A+
Revised Draft Grade: C+ (15.3/30.0) or 2.55 per player.
The thing was, this was considered one of the best drafts of the season, but when you look at the numbers it was certainly above average, but not a home run. Miller and Dillon are the two drags here, but the Texans did manage to find 3 starters, but they didn't have any real stars in this draft. While it was a good draft, it wasn't a GREAT draft by any means.
They also traded up too many times and only had six picks. This was peak Rick Smith although it might have been his best overall draft performance during his tenure.
As you can see above, it's probably recommended that you skip draft grades. As a matter of fact, I think all drafts should not be graded until three years have passed. If you look at the various regrading articles all of them have both of these teams faring worse than initial projections (even if their projections were less rosy than the ones I selected above). Here's just one example:
CBS Sports 2016 draft regrade
So, pay no attention to that draft grader behind the curtain, UNLESS he's providing grades for the 2016 draft.
Because really this is the first year we should be looking at that closely.
I HATE what follows, the grading of a current class of NFL prospects prior to the draftees even putting on a uniform.
To illustrate the problems with this I present to you two "then and now" draft analysis from two teams. One team that I root for (The San Francisco 49ers) and one team that I follow and blog a lot about because I currently live in their city (The Houston Texans.)
The draft in question is the 2016 draft, which I use as an illustration because a.) It's three years in the past which has allowed ample time for the rookie class to shake out and b.) It's illustrative of just how many unknowns there really are in the draft process.
Let's start with the 49ers first.
Picks: (I'm using a 5.0 scale to grade players based on their performance in relation to their draft position etc. This is my scale, if you don't like it make your own.)
Round 1(7): DeForest Buckner - Oregon (DL) - Currently a starter and a player who's missed only two games since being drafted Buckner was a Pro Bowl invitee this year. That's pretty much what you want from your first pick in the draft. Grade: A 4.4/5.0
Round 1 (28): Joshua Garnett - Stanford (G) - Frequently injured Garnett is now a "depth" player who does not start. It's questionable how much longer he'll be on the team. You want better from a 1st round pic. Grade: D 1.5/5.0
Round 3 (68): Will Redmund - Mississippi State (CB) - Only spent one season with the team before being cut. Picked up by Green Bay and is currently a depth corner for them. Disappointing for a player many thought would help to build a base. Grade F 0.7/5.0
Round 4 (133): Rashard Robinson - LSU (CB) - Another player that is no longer on the roster, although he is still in the league, playing for the New York Jets. But you want starters in the 3rd round, if not stars. Grade: F 0.5/5.0
Round 5 (142) Ronald Blair III - Appalachian State (DL) - Has turned into a decent back-up/rotation DL for the team which is a pretty good return on a 5th round pick to be perfectly honest. Grade: B+ 3.8/5.0
Round 5 (145) John Theus - Georgia (OL) - Never made the team and never could pick up anywhere else in the league. Currently out of football. Grade: F 0.0/5.0
Round 5 (174) Fahn Cooper - Ole Miss (OL) Never made the team, never played a down, currently out of football. Grade: F 0.0/5.0
Round 6 (207) Jeff Driskel - Louisiana Tech (QB) - Never latched on with SF but is still in the league and played last year as a backup QB for Cincinnati. not too bad for a 6th round pick. But no help to the team itself. Grade: D+ 1.7/5.0
Round 6 (211) Kelvin Taylor - Florida (RB) - Another player who was expected to possibly contribute, but never played a down, and is currently out of the league. Grade: F 0.0/5.0
Round 6 (213) Aaron Burbridge - Michigan State (WR) - Still another "never made the team, never played a down in the NFL" player in this draft. Considering how high the draft was ranked that's unacceptable. Grade: F 0.0/5.0
Round 7 (249) Prince Charles Iworah - Western Kentucky (CB) - To be fair, he did appear in one regular season game, so that's some production. Giving him a flat zero would be unfair for a 7th round pick not projected to make the team (which he did). Grade: F 0.1/5.0
Original Draft Grade: B+
Revised Draft Grade: D- (12.7/55.0) or 1.1545 average points per player.
The thing is, after the 49ers completed this draft the praise could not be lathered on more deeply. Some in the NFL considered this to be a "foundation" draft full of players, from top to bottom, that would help the team from years to come. 3 years later and it feels like a lost draft class.
Next, lets look at the Texans
Round 1 (21) Will Fuller V - Notre Dame (WR) - Fuller has been hit and miss, with his highs being really good and his lows being injuries. Still, he's been a productive player who might grade higher were he able to be healthy more often. Grade: B- 3.2/5.0
Round 2 (50) Nick Martin - Notre Dame (C) - After sitting out his first year he's started every game for the team the last two and is just about the only thing on the Texans offensive line that doesn't need fixing. Good, solid player drafted in round 2, an oddity for this team. Grade: A- 4.2/5.0
Round 3 (85) Braxton Miller - Ohio State (WR) - At this point this pick was considered a possible steal, and while he was given a chance with the team, his potential never materialized and he was eventually cut and is currently out of football. Grade: D+ 1.1/5.0
Round 4 (113) Tyler Ervin - San Jose State (RB) - Mainly a special teams player and deep depth at RB. Still, when you consider his draft position that he's on the team means that he's living up to expectations. Grade: C 2.2/5.0
Round 5 (159) K J Dillon - West Virginia (SS) - Didn't make the team and is no longer in football. Usually the Texans make these types of picks in the 2nd and 3rd rounds. Grade: F 0.0/5.0
Round 5 (166) D J Reader - Clemson (DT) - Snagged via a trade up with the Patriots Reader has become a durable starting interior defensive lineman and is a solid contributor to the defense. That's pretty good return for that position. Grade: A+ 4.6/5.0
Original Draft Grade: A+
Revised Draft Grade: C+ (15.3/30.0) or 2.55 per player.
The thing was, this was considered one of the best drafts of the season, but when you look at the numbers it was certainly above average, but not a home run. Miller and Dillon are the two drags here, but the Texans did manage to find 3 starters, but they didn't have any real stars in this draft. While it was a good draft, it wasn't a GREAT draft by any means.
They also traded up too many times and only had six picks. This was peak Rick Smith although it might have been his best overall draft performance during his tenure.
As you can see above, it's probably recommended that you skip draft grades. As a matter of fact, I think all drafts should not be graded until three years have passed. If you look at the various regrading articles all of them have both of these teams faring worse than initial projections (even if their projections were less rosy than the ones I selected above). Here's just one example:
CBS Sports 2016 draft regrade
So, pay no attention to that draft grader behind the curtain, UNLESS he's providing grades for the 2016 draft.
Because really this is the first year we should be looking at that closely.
Wednesday, April 10, 2019
Action Episode III: Where I tag out.
Sorry that I'm a little late on this, but I've been debating how the 3rd installment of "Action" that aired Sunday night left me feeling.
In a word: Done.
Yes, I'll probably watch the 4th (and thankfully the last) episode on Sunday night but I'm going to walk away from it feeling that a real opportunity was missed. An opportunity to show the rank-and-file sports gambler whose life is really going to change due to this.
Instead we got the following:
1. Bill "Krack" Krackenberger - Arguably the best, most well-rounded person to come out of this show. I find myself liking Mr. Krack. He's a guy I'd love to sit down and have a drink with and talk sports betting. He's also been right a majority of the time, which is no surprise from a professional bettor.
2. David "Vegas Dave" Oancea. - The tout, a jerk of epic proportions and someone who, to his credit, took being right on a couple of bombs to parlay that into selling picks that are more wrong than right, and who has been accused of wire and other frauds and seems to have bought some fancy things with his winnings and then tried to convince us that he's at the "top of the game" as a result of it. Easily the worst person on the show, he's also the least interesting. There's nothing fun about watching him preen.
3. Todd Winshev - A gambling addict who can be hard to watch at times. To be truthful, I find myself liking the guy and I feel sorry for him, but you can't help but get the feeling that he's going to flame out soon the way he is going. I hope the best for him, but I fear the worst.
4. Kelly Stewart - At this point what is there to say? Through no fault of her own she's being portrayed in a manner that I don't think she would view as negative, but it is. They keep referring to her "big wins" from long ago in the same manner that they do Vegas Dave. The only difference being she genuinely seems to be a nice person. but they're trying to sexualize her in a manner they're not doing with the other key people.
What's REALLY missing from "Action" is the rank and file gambler, the bro who goes with his friends to a book, bets a couple of hundred on the games, wins a few, loses more, and then heads out to the clubs, the blackjack tables or elsewhere to finish his Vegas trip.
THESE are the people who will be affected most by the changes in gambling laws, as suddenly they might have a local option. Yet, Action has been mute on them.
It's a missed opportunity, and it's really hurt the quality of the show.
In a word: Done.
Yes, I'll probably watch the 4th (and thankfully the last) episode on Sunday night but I'm going to walk away from it feeling that a real opportunity was missed. An opportunity to show the rank-and-file sports gambler whose life is really going to change due to this.
Instead we got the following:
1. Bill "Krack" Krackenberger - Arguably the best, most well-rounded person to come out of this show. I find myself liking Mr. Krack. He's a guy I'd love to sit down and have a drink with and talk sports betting. He's also been right a majority of the time, which is no surprise from a professional bettor.
2. David "Vegas Dave" Oancea. - The tout, a jerk of epic proportions and someone who, to his credit, took being right on a couple of bombs to parlay that into selling picks that are more wrong than right, and who has been accused of wire and other frauds and seems to have bought some fancy things with his winnings and then tried to convince us that he's at the "top of the game" as a result of it. Easily the worst person on the show, he's also the least interesting. There's nothing fun about watching him preen.
3. Todd Winshev - A gambling addict who can be hard to watch at times. To be truthful, I find myself liking the guy and I feel sorry for him, but you can't help but get the feeling that he's going to flame out soon the way he is going. I hope the best for him, but I fear the worst.
4. Kelly Stewart - At this point what is there to say? Through no fault of her own she's being portrayed in a manner that I don't think she would view as negative, but it is. They keep referring to her "big wins" from long ago in the same manner that they do Vegas Dave. The only difference being she genuinely seems to be a nice person. but they're trying to sexualize her in a manner they're not doing with the other key people.
What's REALLY missing from "Action" is the rank and file gambler, the bro who goes with his friends to a book, bets a couple of hundred on the games, wins a few, loses more, and then heads out to the clubs, the blackjack tables or elsewhere to finish his Vegas trip.
THESE are the people who will be affected most by the changes in gambling laws, as suddenly they might have a local option. Yet, Action has been mute on them.
It's a missed opportunity, and it's really hurt the quality of the show.
Monday, April 1, 2019
Adventures in Amateur Television Criticism: "Action Episode II"
The second episode of Action the 3-part docu-series airing Sunday evenings on Showtime was, as I predicted, a much tougher slog.
It also might turn out to be the most interesting episode of them all.
It centered around losing, problem gambling, gambling addiction while ironically not making a strong case for or against. Yes, you heard (several times) the old adage that "Only about 1% of people win long-term" and this is true. You also got to see the 1% living opulently in the Versailles Villa at Westgate. (It should also be noted that the professional gambler highlighted there was correct on ALL three of the bets they aired.)
The rest of the story was addicted gamblers, and con artists, talking about how they "went to gambler's anonymous" but that it didn't work for them. They then went on to tell you how they "weren't like anyone else there" which is probably not true.
If you were like me you walked away from this thinking that the only difference between a professional bettor and an addicted won is the win/loss column.
They did have one line, from bookmaker Jimmy Vaccaro, that was true regarding pro gamblers never "chasing" while amateur gamblers did that quite often. Bill “Krack” Krackomberger again looked the best of all with his advice during dinner to never try and get it back. In her one good moment on air (more on this later) Kelly "KellyinVegas" Stewart wisely provide the "live to bet another day" adage.
Dave "Vegas Dave" Oancea again came across as slimy and dishonest, and a man who might potentially have serious mental issues when it comes to dealing with the truth.
The biggest flaw in the series so far is two-fold.
1. An over-reliance on industry 'professionals' to tell the story and..
2. Just getting some basic things wrong.
The anti-gambling activist was just one part. After he stood up and basically stated "government-sponsored, legalized gambling is bad" there was no recognition that the prohibition of the same, along with the prohibition of alcohol, directly led to the rise of the mafia in the United State, just as the prohibition of scheduled drugs has led to increases in gang activity, and a flourishing of the cartels.
Brent Musberger pointed out, accurately, that most betting "cheating" scandals were busted because the above-ground bookmakers noticed, and reported, unusual betting patterns. The house wants a clean game, they understand that they are the beneficiaries of this, why would they want anything different?
But still, acting as if the absence of legalized gambling means that there will be no gambling is a disingenuous argument. It should be presented as such but in many cases the producers of this show seem content to allow people to make false, or partially false, statements, and then only offer tepid response to it without asking any follow-up questions whatsoever.
Vegas Dave put out two "whale plays" one of which barely covered, and one which covered easily, he then teased a third "whale play" that we were never allowed to see. The whale of Westgate offered 3 plays that we know, now that the season is over, were winners. But we never were allowed to see anything else. We haven't seen much of anyone else's picks, except the Dallas over New Orleans pick of Kelly Stewart.
Which brings us back to Stewart, who was displayed in this episode as a sexual object more concerned with her appearance and age than anything else. She's being held up as an oddity in the industry to be gawked at, not as someone with any discernible gambling edge as was hinted at in the first show. It's not overt sexism, it's more latent, and to be fair they did bring up Winshev's appearance as well.
I'll close with Todd Winshev, who is both the most tragic character that's being highlighted as well as the most sympathetic, and the most sad. All that said, I like Todd Winshev, there but for the grace of God go we. His bare apartment with no furnishings and little life outside of sports betting and his "day" job should serve as a caution to us all.
He also mentioned that he's alone, which appears to be the focus of the next episode. The loneliness of gambling is odd to me because I have a wife and friends who enjoy it to.
Gambling is entertainment. When it stops being fun then that's when you should walk-away. What this week's show illustrated is just how few actually do.
It also might turn out to be the most interesting episode of them all.
It centered around losing, problem gambling, gambling addiction while ironically not making a strong case for or against. Yes, you heard (several times) the old adage that "Only about 1% of people win long-term" and this is true. You also got to see the 1% living opulently in the Versailles Villa at Westgate. (It should also be noted that the professional gambler highlighted there was correct on ALL three of the bets they aired.)
The rest of the story was addicted gamblers, and con artists, talking about how they "went to gambler's anonymous" but that it didn't work for them. They then went on to tell you how they "weren't like anyone else there" which is probably not true.
If you were like me you walked away from this thinking that the only difference between a professional bettor and an addicted won is the win/loss column.
They did have one line, from bookmaker Jimmy Vaccaro, that was true regarding pro gamblers never "chasing" while amateur gamblers did that quite often. Bill “Krack” Krackomberger again looked the best of all with his advice during dinner to never try and get it back. In her one good moment on air (more on this later) Kelly "KellyinVegas" Stewart wisely provide the "live to bet another day" adage.
Dave "Vegas Dave" Oancea again came across as slimy and dishonest, and a man who might potentially have serious mental issues when it comes to dealing with the truth.
The biggest flaw in the series so far is two-fold.
1. An over-reliance on industry 'professionals' to tell the story and..
2. Just getting some basic things wrong.
The anti-gambling activist was just one part. After he stood up and basically stated "government-sponsored, legalized gambling is bad" there was no recognition that the prohibition of the same, along with the prohibition of alcohol, directly led to the rise of the mafia in the United State, just as the prohibition of scheduled drugs has led to increases in gang activity, and a flourishing of the cartels.
Brent Musberger pointed out, accurately, that most betting "cheating" scandals were busted because the above-ground bookmakers noticed, and reported, unusual betting patterns. The house wants a clean game, they understand that they are the beneficiaries of this, why would they want anything different?
But still, acting as if the absence of legalized gambling means that there will be no gambling is a disingenuous argument. It should be presented as such but in many cases the producers of this show seem content to allow people to make false, or partially false, statements, and then only offer tepid response to it without asking any follow-up questions whatsoever.
Vegas Dave put out two "whale plays" one of which barely covered, and one which covered easily, he then teased a third "whale play" that we were never allowed to see. The whale of Westgate offered 3 plays that we know, now that the season is over, were winners. But we never were allowed to see anything else. We haven't seen much of anyone else's picks, except the Dallas over New Orleans pick of Kelly Stewart.
Which brings us back to Stewart, who was displayed in this episode as a sexual object more concerned with her appearance and age than anything else. She's being held up as an oddity in the industry to be gawked at, not as someone with any discernible gambling edge as was hinted at in the first show. It's not overt sexism, it's more latent, and to be fair they did bring up Winshev's appearance as well.
I'll close with Todd Winshev, who is both the most tragic character that's being highlighted as well as the most sympathetic, and the most sad. All that said, I like Todd Winshev, there but for the grace of God go we. His bare apartment with no furnishings and little life outside of sports betting and his "day" job should serve as a caution to us all.
He also mentioned that he's alone, which appears to be the focus of the next episode. The loneliness of gambling is odd to me because I have a wife and friends who enjoy it to.
Gambling is entertainment. When it stops being fun then that's when you should walk-away. What this week's show illustrated is just how few actually do.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)