Poker Tournaments: Gap Concept

Sometimes in tournaments there come times when a special situation arises. One of these situations that a player can encounter during a poker tournament is known under the name of “The gap concept”.

The terminology of gap concept was first pioneered by an extraordinary poker writer named David Skylansky. This basically means that when you are playing poker you can find yourself in the situation when you just need a hand that is better than the one you are holding in order to play against another player. The opponent would have to open the betting and to play against him your hand has to be better than his hand you would have needed to open the betting yourself. That difference between you actual hand and the hand you would have needed in this case, to call his bet, is the difference that defines the gap concept.

This particular difference varies a lot during poker tournaments. It is defined mostly by the poker playing style of your opponents, whether it is tight or loose. The gap is smaller when others play loose poker and it growth bigger and bigger as they get tighter. This happens mostly because a tight player will not take so many chances but he will also hold on to his hand once he has a good one.

Let’s say you are first in and you hold a hand that doesn’t necessarily pushes you to bet. But another player bets or raises and you have to call or raise his or hers bet in order to prove the power of your hand or just to stay in the game and be able to play it the way you intended in the first place. The gap concept is not always a bad situation. Players can take advantage of this gap and turn the odds around. If your first choice was to semi-bluff, the gap concept gives the opportunity to do so without thinking about it. If you call a bet with a hand you wouldn’t normally do that, it doesn’t mean you will lose the round. It gives you and opportunity to enter further bidding rounds that you normally wouldn’t have entered and it also make you hope and maybe hit a draw with the help of additional cards dealt.

On the other hand, if you are positioned in late position when you play Texas hold’em and you have quite a few chips on your stack, then you can raise and call with lower hands. If you have hands like a small pair or Ace plus another unimportant card you can call a bet without many risks, but be aware of the aggressiveness of players in first position and blinds because if they are very aggressive and call or raise you back a lot of times then you can waste a lot of your stack for a hand that just isn’t worth it.

‘Sir Michael Stoute Gave Me a Bollocking and Told Me Not to Be a Pessimist’ 

He has been branded a pessimist by Sir Michael Stoute for admitting as much, but Richard Brown of Blandford Bloodstock, who bought Cazoo Derby hero Desert Crown (GB) (Nathaniel {Ire}), believes Saturday's achievement will never be topped.

Brown, a renowned bloodstock agent with over 20 years of experience in the game, went to 280,000gns to secure Desert Crown on behalf of Saeed Suhail at Book 2 at Tattersalls in 2020 and counts himself as extremely lucky to have sourced what he believes is a once-in-a-lifetime colt. 

“I ended up at Sir Michael's for quite a few glasses of wine on Saturday night,” said Brown on Monday. “I called him yesterday [Sunday] to thank him and I said, 'look, you've done this before but I haven't and I'm sure I never will again.' 

“He gave me a bollocking and told me not to be a pessimist. I think it's once-in-a-lifetime stuff, mainly because so few Derby winners are offered up at public auction and you are up against the might of the top breeding operations like Coolmore, Juddmonte, Aga Khan and Godolphin. The chance of buying a horse like Desert Crown is so slim. We got very lucky.”

Desert Crown became Stoute's sixth Derby winner when powering home at Epsom under Richard Kingscote who, like Brown, was securing his first Derby. Prior to Saturday, Brown may have been best known for sourcing dual Group 1-winning juvenile Perfect Power (Ire) (Ardad {Ire}) and top-notch sprinter Dream Ahead. However, Desert Crown eclipses all other achievements in the business and Brown is convinced he will never come across one better. 

He explained, “This won't be topped. It can't be topped. Rabbah Bloodstock was formed in 2006 and Jono Mills, who is one of my greatest mates, is the managing director and I work very closely with him, Bruce Raymond and Philip Robinson. It's through them that I have been able to buy for the people that I do. Also, I have known Sir Michael for a long time and, while we haven't done a lot of business together, we share a pretty big passion for cricket, which is all we ever seem to talk about. To be a small part of that team and to do it with these guys is very special.”

Brown added, “I am fortunate to buy for the people I do. I get to go to the sales and pick out the horses I like for people who trust me. It gives you a sporting chance. I spent many years going to the sales and not being able to buy these types of horses so I realise how fortunate I am that I have people who will back me to stretch out if I like one.”

Brown clearly liked Desert Crown as a yearling, as did plenty of others, given the colt fetched 280,000gns, above average for a colt by Nathaniel. But Brown was never going to be beaten to Desert Crown. Such was his love for him as a yearling, Brown revealed how he even ignored his own advice by laying his cards on the table and declaring his interest in the colt before he walked into the ring.

He recalled, “It's easy to say it now but he was outstanding, just a gorgeous horse with a great temperament, which he is showing now as a racehorse. We put a lot of emphasis on temperament at the sales and he just showed fantastically well. 

“I actually pride myself on my poker face at the sales but I couldn't hide my love for this guy. I told Gary Robinson, who bred the horse, what an outstanding specimen that he was and, as the words were coming out of my mouth, I was thinking 'what are you doing, what about your poker face?' He was just bombproof, such a cool dude, and he showed that on Saturday. He walked around the paddock and down to the start like a pro and he was a pro during the race as well.”

Brown has been buying for Desert Crown's owner Saeed Suhail, whose colours were also carried to Derby glory by Kris Kin (Kris S) in 2003, for three years. He sources between eight and 10 yearlings for the owner every year and, while the first batch were forgettable, Brown believes he is making up for his mistakes with Desert Crown. 

He explained, “Desert Crown is part of the second crop of horses I bought for Saeed Suhail. I didn't do a very good job with the first crop. We had some winners but didn't have a good horse. “I don't think I got the brief properly in the first year but we gave a good throw for a few horses in the second crop and luckily it's working out. To produce a Derby winner for Saeed Suhail is fantastic and there's some very positive reports about a couple of the 2-year-olds so hopefully that first crop is well and truly forgotten now.”

Brown added, “Nathaniel is a top-class stallion. You can't sire a mare like Enable (GB) without being top class. Andrew Stone of St Albans Bloodstock, who I do a lot of work for, had God Given (GB). She won a Group 2 in Britain before winning a Group 1 in Italy and was actually Luca Cumani's last Group 1 winner, so we have been huge fans of Nathaniel all the way through and the market does not give him the respect that he deserves. 

“That can happen. I have always thought he was a very underappreciated stallion so, when I saw a colt as nice as Desert Crown, I knew we had a chance. If he was by Frankel (GB), Dubawi (Ire) or Sea The Stars (Ire), I wouldn't have been able to buy him. He's an absolute beauty and the exciting thing is that he was still one of the more unfurnished colts in the Derby field so there should be a lot more to come from him.”

There is still an amount of celebrating to do before a plan is drawn up for the rest of the season but Brown is convinced that Desert Crown can build on Saturday's heroics. 

He said, “Sir Michael's training was exemplary. This horse had a minor setback in the spring. I went to see him in March and he was standing in his box so he was definitely undercooked heading into the Dante. When he won the Dante, I did think we had something special on our hands and it's looking that way now.”

“We are all having dinner tonight and I am sure it [future plans] will be discussed but that's well above my pay grade. The great thing is that, when you have guys as experienced as Bruce Raymond, Saeed's racing manager, and Sir Michael, you don't need to worry about it. They'll get things right. Where they decide to go next, that's down to them, I'm just lucky to be a small part of the team.”

 

The post ‘Sir Michael Stoute Gave Me a Bollocking and Told Me Not to Be a Pessimist’  appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

HISA Questions and Answers: Part Two

This last week has witnessed a flurry of developments and information drops as the countdown to July 1–the official take-off for the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act (HISA)–continues apace.

Just last Friday, for example, HISA representatives fielded questions in an online industry forum, while the law's draft Anti-Doping and Medication Control (ADMC) rules have been issued for public comment.

HISA's official website can be found here, while the online registration portal can be found here.

Aside from providing a cheat sheet to help guide industry participants through the launch, TDN has been fielding unanswered questions that industry participants have about the process to register, and about the new playing field come July 1, forwarding them to HISA for response.

TDN published the first batch of questions last week. The latest batch is posted below, and includes this registration warning:

“Beginning July 1, 2022, horses will not be allowed to run in a race if the trainer has not registered the horse with HISA.”

Some of the following questions have been edited for brevity and clarity. If any submitted questions aren't answered here, we will endeavor to include them in the next batch.

Question: My question concerns horses at a farm or a lay-up facility. While it doesn't look like everyone employed at one of these places will need to be registered as a covered person, some of these people (like farm managers and veterinarians) will have a lot of responsibility over prescribed medications and veterinary treatments given to the horses in their care. 

I see that there are important lay-up and treatment records that need to be made available to HISA. And so, if some of the people administering treatments and medications at a farm or facility aren't registered as “covered persons” under HISA, who's going to be ultimately responsible for what goes on there? The trainers? The owners?

HISA: You're correct, most of the employees who work at farms and lay-up facilities are not required to register with HISA. Employees that are licensed with a State Racing Commission and work directly with covered horses are required to register with HISA. For example, if a veterinarian is licensed by a state racing commission and is treating a covered horse at a lay-up facility, he/she is required to register with HISA.

The responsible person, usually the trainer, must obtain and maintain all exercise and medication treatment records for horses that are at farms, lay-up facilities and training centers. In the circumstances that the trainer is not the responsible person for the horse, the owner will be responsible for maintaining all exercise and medication treatment records for horses that are at farms and lay-up facilities.

Q: According to the jockey whip rule, in certain violations, the owner loses the purse. My understanding is that it's just the purse that's lost, while the horse keeps its place. If that's correct, where will the purse money go?

H: There are three classes of jockey crop use violations. Class 1 violations do not result in a loss of purse. If a crop violation is a Class 2 or Class 3 violation, the horse will be disqualified from purse earnings.

HISA's Racetrack Safety Committee will provide guidance on how that purse money will be used/allocated in the coming weeks.

Q: What if I am confused by the new regulations and I was supposed to register, but I don't? What are the consequences? And who enforces them?

H: Beginning July 1, 2022, horses will not be allowed to run in a race if the trainer has not registered the horse with HISA.

HISA is focused on getting as many people and horses as possible registered before July 1. This includes educating, assisting and engaging with stakeholders across the industry to ensure everyone is well-informed and well-equipped to get registered as soon as possible.

Q: Once we register ourselves, with our physical address being one of the requirements, we are authorizing the 'Authority' free access to our homes/farms. Please can you explain in detail why?

H: HISA will always exercise its authority in good faith and for the benefit of the sport. The Act passed by Congress provides that the Authority shall develop uniform procedures and rules authorizing “access to offices, racetrack facilities, other places of business, books, records, and personal property of covered persons that are used in the care, treatment, training, and racing of covered horses.”

Our original regulation stated: The Authority “[s]hall have free access to the books, records, offices, racetrack facilities, and other places of business of Covered Persons that are used in the care, treatment, training, and racing of Covered Horses, and to the books, records, offices, facilities, and other places of business of any person who owns a Covered Horse or performs services on a Covered Horse.”

The FTC in approving the Enforcement Rules noted that commentators who objected to this rule were really objecting to the Act since our rule tracked the Act. Despite the rule being approved by the FTC, we have revised the rule and will be sending the revisions to the FTC in the next few days. The relevant rule now states:

(1) Shall have free access to:

(i) with regard to Covered Persons, books, records, offices, racetrack facilities, and other places of business of Covered Persons that relate to the care, treatment, training, and racing of Covered Horses, and

(ii) with regard to any person who owns a Covered Horse or performs services on a Covered Horse, books, records, offices, facilities, and other places of business that relate to the care, treatment, training, and racing of Covered Horses.

Even if the revised rules are not approved by the FTC by July 1, 2022, HISA will abide by these portions of the amended regulations.

And finally, it is important to note that the language that Congress utilized is not novel. For example, current Kentucky law utilizes similar language as HISA's original regulation. It states:

“The racing commission, its representatives and employees, may visit, investigate and have free access to the office, track, facilities, or other places of business of any licensee, or any person owning a horse or performing services regulated by this chapter on a horse registered to participate in a breeders incentive fund under the jurisdiction of the racing commission.”

Q: Rule 8400 Investigatory Powers section a) subsection 1). This rule also allows HISA to seize “medication, drugs, paraphernalia, or substance in violation or suspected violation of the 'Authority,” along with all your books and files.

In every state, it's against the rules for any person not a vet to have injectables, needles, and syringes on the track. But under this rule, if you're in a rural area (which most farms, by definition, are) and have such perfectly legal medications on your property to treat your horses in an emergency when a vet may be hours away from you, you would be in violation of the “Authority's” rules and subject to seizure, fines, and suspension of racing privileges.

If accurate, this makes absolutely no sense, so please can you provide the reasons behind this?

H: HISA's regulations regarding hypodermic needles and syringes apply to Covered Racetracks and Covered Training Facilities. These regulations do not apply to farms.

Q: Under the “Authority's” revised rules (not yet submitted to the FTC) weekends and holidays are no longer “working days” and won't be considered “counted” days. If I'm reading this right, if you receive a five-day suspension starting Tuesday, you cannot return to work on Sunday because it's not a “working day”? And by waiting until Monday, you will have served six days? In horse racing, every day is a working day!

H: This is incorrect. The new provisions for calculation of time addresses only the response dates set forth in the Enforcement Rules.

For example, it makes clear that if an individual is given a certain number of days to file an appeal or file a brief and that day falls on a holiday or weekend then the deadline is the next working day. The calculation of time rule in the Enforcement Rules has nothing to do with the numbers of days someone serves for a suspension.

Additionally, this method of calculating time helps horsemen by giving them extra days to respond and not requiring them to count weekends which are often busy race days.

Q: I read the Q&A, and the answer to who needs to register says someone who works regularly in the stable area. Others who have access but don't work in the stable in the normal course of their job do not have to be registered. Access to the stable is still controlled by state commission licensing. This clears it up except their site says the complete opposite. Their site says any employee who has any access to the stables must register. Can you please try to clarify the clarification which clarified nothing?

H: This language has been updated on the HISA website. To be clear: you must register as a Covered Person if you are licensed by a State Racing Commission, unless you have no contact with Covered Horses and you do not have access to the restricted areas of a racetrack in the ordinary course of carrying out your duties. This means that if your job does not regularly require you to access the stable area in the normal course of your work, you are not required to register. Examples of other persons who do not need to register include, but are not limited to: vendors of goods or services and racetrack employees or contractors who do not have access to restricted areas (i.e. food service providers, ticket takers, mutuel employees, etc.). EVERYONE ELSE MUST REGISTER AS A COVERED PERSON.

The post HISA Questions and Answers: Part Two appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

CDI: Baffert ‘Broke Rules, Must Bear Consequences’

Just days after the one-year anniversary of Churchill Downs, Inc. (CDI)'s, ruling-off of trainer Bob Baffert over his repeated equine medication violations, the gaming corporation that controls the GI Kentucky Derby swatted back at the Hall of Fame trainer in federal court in an attempt to get a judge to dismiss a lawsuit initiated by Baffert that aims to reverse the two-year ban.

“For the past eleven months, Bob Baffert has tried to dodge accountability for drugging Medina Spirit,” CDI wrote in a reply brief filed June 6 in United States District Court (Western District of Kentucky, Louisville Division).

“He has brought legal challenges around the country, all of which have ended in failure,” the filing continued. “The Kentucky Horse Racing Commission (KHRC) and the New York Racing Association (NYRA)–organizations Baffert admits have 'no skin in the game'–have independently reached the same conclusion as CDI: Baffert broke the rules and must bear the consequences.”

Baffert, whose horses have crossed the finish wire first in the Derby a record seven times, was declared unwelcome to race in the Derby or at any CDI-controlled property through the 2023 spring meet after post-race tests revealed his 2021 Derby winner, Medina Spirit, tested positive for betamethasone.

The CDI ban is separate from the under-appeal, 90-day suspension Baffert is currently serving for the Class C drug infraction ruling that was handed down in February by the KHRC.

“In this Court, Baffert has failed to defend the legal sufficiency of his complaint, and this lawsuit should meet the same fate as all his others,” CDI's filing stated.

The filing continued: “None of this misdirection works…. Baffert's lawsuit is a desperate and baseless attack on CDI's right to protect the integrity, reputation, and safety of the races it hosts. The Court should dismiss his complaint.”

Baffert doesn't see it that way. The federal lawsuit he filed Feb. 28 against CDI, its chief executive, Bill Carstanjen, and corporate board chair, Alex Rankin, alleged that Churchill Downs is actually a “municipal park” that counts as “public property,” and that CDI is purportedly restraining his ability to participate in interstate commerce.

Baffert also took umbrage with CDI's supposed “usurping” of the powers of the state racing commission to police the sport, and he alleged a “conspiracy” by CDI's higher-ups to “deprive [his clients] of their freedom to select their chosen trainer for their Derby horses while leaving the licenses of their own trainers unencumbered.”

CDI, in its June 6 rebuttal, described Baffert's legal approach as “free-wheeling,” adding that “he offers a jumble of factors that might bear on state action, propounding six different formulations in a single perplexing paragraph. The Sixth Circuit does not take this approach. It holds plaintiffs 'must prove' state action under one of three tests established by the Supreme Court.”

They are, according to CDI:

The Function Test–“Baffert fails to allege facts showing that horse racing has been 'traditionally and exclusively performed' by 'the government' in Kentucky.”

The Compulsion Test–“Baffert has not plausibly alleged that Kentucky compelled CDI to suspend him.”

The Nexus Test–“Baffert drains the thesaurus in offering various proposed formulations of state action, but he cannot satisfy the nexus test, which requires showing Kentucky was 'a joint participant in the challenged activity.'”

As for Baffert's assertion that Churchill Downs is a public space because CDI 20 years ago transferred its flagship Louisville facility to the city and then leased back the land as part of a lucrative redevelopment financing deal, CDI wrote that the track “is not a public park, and there is no constitutional right to race in the Derby or [GI Kentucky] Oaks. Baffert…remains free to attend races at the Racetrack, [but] there is no 'liberty interest' in competing in horse races at a privately operated track.”

The CDI filing continued: “Baffert has not even pled a coherent theory as to how the suspension restrained trade…. Even if the suspension could be deemed a restraint of trade under some other theory Baffert does not articulate, it would be evaluated under the rule of reason…which would require Baffert to establish that Defendants have market power.

“Here, however, Baffert does not even allege that CDI or Carstanjen compete in a 'horse breeding' market, let alone have market power in it.”
The filing continued: “As to Rankin, the complaint contains no plausible factual allegations that he exerts power over the purported market, nor could it, given that Rankin is just one among a universe of horse breeders in the United States and is not even alleged to have ever run a horse in the Derby or Oaks.”

The post CDI: Baffert ‘Broke Rules, Must Bear Consequences’ appeared first on TDN | Thoroughbred Daily News | Horse Racing News, Results and Video | Thoroughbred Breeding and Auctions.

Source of original post

Verified by MonsterInsights