No one will argue that simulcast thoroughbred racing--particularly in combination with OTB/satellite or online wagering---has made the sport more accessible and enjoyable for thousands of racing fans than perhaps any other development since the sport began. 

The technology that has afforded the convenience we fans enjoy has also created an attitude that smacks of arrogance, and perhaps a touch of snobbery as well. That attitude is a variation of the "big city is better than small town" attitude that many of us experience or fall victim to in our travels through life. 

In the late eighties through early nineties, as major tracks (like Santa Anita, Belmont, Arlington, Gulfstream) began to appear on simulcast cards everywhere, many local players (who lived near smaller tracks, like Finger Lakes, the California Fair Tracks, Thistledown, or Fonner Park), you could hear more and more locals saying "Why should I play these bottom-of-the-barrel claimers when I can play far better horses who form alone is much more consistent than the pigs I've been playing for years?" 

True, a hardcore loyal following played their small local track (without which the other wouldn't have the opportunity to pooh-pooh the cheaper races and play the bigger one in the first place!) AND the major tracks hundreds or thousands of miles away. 

I've had friends in larger cities ask me "Are you nuts playing horses in Nebraska when you can be playing Del Mar and Saratoga?" 

No, I'm not nuts, and neither is Andy Beyer, who revealed the secret at the DRF's Handicapping Expo 2000 in Las Vegas last February: savvy players have a real nice little gold mine waiting for them at smaller tracks that simulcast their races.

Andy told handicappers in attendance that he planned to seriously play Prairie Meadows, the Des Moines, Iowa track which cards $2,500 claimers and ultra-cheap maidens, along with a handful of  classier races, although none really come close to the biggies (as in Graded Stakes) carded at major tracks. 

The reason why Andy and I both play some of the smaller tracks is primary because they are overlooked by most simulcast players and therefore offer real wagering value and moneymaking opportunities. 

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand that: 

a. value is where you find it, regardless of track 
b. within the relative track class structures, there are unplayable dirt-cheap races at larger tracks, as well as at smaller ones 
c. you use different handicapping tools for different races as each race--and track--require 

Some comments on point (c) are in order. 

Some big-track approaches will not work well at smaller tracks. If you're a pace handicapper, the two turns of bullrings may wreak havoc with your numbers. If you're a class handicapper, sometimes you have to understand very quickly that the two lowest claiming levels at a cheap track are really the same level, as available stock is simply entered in whatever race is available in a given week; one week it may be a $2500 race, the next, a $3500, with the same batch of horses entered in both. 

Sometimes, reliable par times can crush small track races easier than at larger tracks. Close attention the old-fashioned way to determining daily track variants can uncover boxcar possibilities, as most simulcast players will not do the work needed to have a real edge. A few years ago, playing Fonner Park (Grand Island, NE) by simulcast here in Omaha, I made some simple pars for the second call and final times and kept track on one page for the whole season, noting races as "fast 3, fast 3" etc., and nailed a $700+ exacta that was logical and not unexpected. (Yeah--I WAS astonished, just the same!) 

At any size track, players who know which trainers traditionally have their horses ready at the beginning of the meet have a special edge. If you're tired of short fields and literally weather-worn racing this time of year at Aqueduct, try joining the limited crowd that knows which trainers have their stock ready for opening weekend at Fonner Park in mid-February when races of less than five furlongs whose runners haven't raced since last year fill the card. 

Andy's comment about Prairie Meadows will lead some to conclude that it's a particularly good track for speed figure handicapping. This is true, but there's much more, with the horses-for-courses factor returning healthy mutuels and successful class handicapping with special attention paid to purse values (PrM's races offer highly inflated purses for the levels of racing there, thanks to solid supplementation from slot machine revenue. 

My friend Spotplay, professional handicapper in his own right, regularly reviews the smaller, often overlooked simulcast signals that many satellite locations use to create a large menu of offerings for handicappers. He finds genuine short-term track biases, running styles that dominate certain types of races, and other specific and track-specific nuances that can be profitable. 

I find it amazing that many OTB's carry signals from tracks for which they do not offer DRF past performances at the site, relegating players to the smaller Equibase programs that are far less informative. However, this is actually an advantage for serious players who download all the info they need from various racing information providers on the Internet. 

Smart handicappers can reap absolute bonanzas at smaller tracks while diehards who refuse to look beyond their major track often ponder over whether a bet is warranted on evenly-matched classier horses who are all going off at crappy low odds. 

Next time you hit a slump or find less than acceptable value at the "big" track you play regularly, consider looking at the "leaky-roof" circuit with a highly selective eye. You might be pleasantly surprised.