RELIGION AND EDUCATION EXPLAIN THE WHITE VOTE

FiveThirtyEightSeptember 23, 2016
Religion And Education Explain The White Vote

What makes white people tick? This question will occupy campaign strategists and forecasters through November. Given that voters of color have, on the whole, decided resoundingly against Donald Trump, the coveted swing voters who will decide this election are overwhelmingly white. This is nothing new, of course, but in the wake of a campaign season that has played heavily on white identity politics, rejection of diversity and race-baiting dog whistles, the specific concerns of white voters have taken on a renewed salience.

It’s an open secret in electoral politics that you can guess someone’s vote pretty accurately based only on her census form. So rather than trying to suss out the sentiments and ideological profiles of voters based on individual testimony, let’s tackle a simpler question: Which demographic traits affect how white Americans vote?

More Politics

A detailed FiveThirtyEight/SurveyMonkey poll conducted this summer1 contains the depth of data necessary to answer this question. Rather than just giving us top-level demographic info, this poll lets us look at intersectional stats, too — for example, what percentage of suburban black women support Trump.2 So we can take any subgroup of the population (in this case, white voters) and see which variables most affect their vote preference.

MOST CLINTON-LEANING MOST TRUMP-LEANING
DEMOGRAPHIC GROUP CLINTON’S VOTE SHARE DEMOGRAPHIC GROUP CLINTON’S VOTE SHARE
Religious attendance Never 71% Weekly 31%
Education Post-grad 64 HS grad or less 35
Pop. density Urban 64 Rural 42
Region Northeast 59 South 41
Gender Woman 56 Man 43
Age 18-29 56 65+ 47
Income 30k-50k 51 50k-75k 46
Two-party vote share among 3,048 respondents; survey conducted Jun. 2-8, 2016

Source: SurveyMonkey Audience

Let’s start with the wrong answer: income. Despite the myth that Trump’s base is poor whites, income is the least predictive3 of white voter support among the seven demographic variables tracked by the poll.

Instead, the two most predictive variables are religious attendance and education. Crucially, these two variables are still more explanatory when considered together. Roughly speaking, a white voter will lean left if she is “more college than church” and will lean right if she is “more church than college.”4

More precisely, we can assign an educational score (no college = 0, some college = 1, college degree = 2) and religious attendance score (never attend = 0, sometimes attend = 1, attend weekly = 2) to each white American. Those with a higher education score are likely to support Clinton, those with a higher religious attendance score are more likely to support Trump, and those with equal scores are more divided.

One quick side note: The three groups in the middle, with “equal influence” from college and church — none/never, some/sometimes and degree/weekly — can be further explained by the third-most predictive variable, urban/suburban/rural residence. Urban voters lean left while suburban and rural voters lean right.

What accounts for this stark church-education pattern in white voter preference? I did some digging and found three potential explanations for the political differences between “college whites” and “church whites.”

Theory No. 1: Different values. College whites and church whites are taught different moral values in their respective houses of learning, values which trickle up into policy preferences. Members of white Christian congregations are more likely than any other racial-religious group to rank personal responsibility above structural factors, such as unequal access to education, in explaining racial disparities in income. And while secular universities rarely purport to give moral teachings to their students, research has found that college education increases tolerance.

This is not to say the GOP is the only party of Christian values; blacks and Latinos, who are overwhelmingly Christian, are mostly Democrats. Rather, Republican ideology seems to be aligned with the values taught in historically white churches: For instance, black and Hispanic members of interracial congregations hold the same individualistic social attitudes as white churchgoers, suggesting that they may adopt these conservative views after extended exposure to white church values.

Theory No. 2: Different knowledge. Another possibility is that college whites and church whites disagree not only on value judgments but on empirical claims about the world. The statement “climate change is caused by human activity” is slightly more likely to be affirmed by those with a college degree; the statement “life begins at conception” is more likely to be affirmed5 by those with regular church attendance.

This theory seems particularly popular among college whites, in no small part because it frames their conservative adversaries as not just misguided but misinformed. And unless you want to get epistemic about the validity of empirical research, it’s hard to deny that university education increases scientific literacy.

Theory No. 3: Different bubbles. The flip side of Theory No. 2 is that both college whites and church whites exist in ideologically pure bubbles, where like-minded friends uncritically reinforce each other’s beliefs. Indeed, college graduates have few less-educated friends; it is also true that liberal professors outnumber conservative professors nearly 5-to-1. The development of public policy in universities and think tanks, then, may not be a crusade for objective knowledge so much as a cartel of secular elites peer-reviewing and advising secular elites for the benefit of secular elites.

This looks to be the theory favored by many church whites, or at least the conservative public figures who represent them. Rick Santorum once referred to universities as “indoctrination mills” lacking in “intellectual diversity”; Antonin Scalia lamented that the Supreme Court was composed entirely of “successful lawyers who studied at Harvard or Yale Law School”; Marco Rubio described “the political class” and “the mainstream media that covers them” as “out of touch with the American people.”

These theories aren’t mutually exclusive, of course, and there may be some element of truth to each of them. But understanding the massive college-church divide helps explain why this election feels less like a debate over policy and more like a war of worldviews.

View on Web

Search Suggestions
Supreme court
A supreme court is the highest court within the hierarchy of many legal jurisdictions.

4 More
“4 More” is the third and final single to be released by De La Soul from their fourth album, Stakes Is High.

Marco Rubio
Marco Antonio Rubio is an American politician and attorney, and the junior United States Senator from Florida.

No. 3
No. 3 is a 1997 South Korean gangster comedy film starring Han Suk-kyu as the titular no. 3 man of a gangster organization who’s aspiring to rise up the ranks and become the leader of his own gang.

Antonin Scalia
Antonin Gregory Scalia was an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States from 1986 until his death in 2016.

Rick Santorum
Richard John “Rick” Santorum, SMOM is an American attorney and Republican Party politician.

Donald Trump
Donald John Trump is an American businessman, television personality, author, politician, and nominee of the Republican Party for President of the United States in the 2016 election.

FiveThirtyEight
FiveThirtyEight, sometimes referred to as 538, is a website that focuses on opinion poll analysis, politics, economics, and sports blogging.

IF YOU NOTICE EVERY CONCERN IS MITIGATED BY…. BETTING ON HORSE RACING OVER SPORTS

    Nevada Entity Betting – Part One

    Senate Bill 443 was passed in 2015 which permits a person or persons to set up shop in Nevada and offer sports betting as an investment opportunity. The entity or fund manager can take investors from anywhere in the United States and can charge scheduled fees or commissions in exchange for their managing of the fund. This includes placing all the bets and all the decision making that goes into choosing those bets. It’s been most often compared to a private hedge fund for sports betting, but many similarities to the “sports advisory” business (selling picks) are there and they’re undeniable. With football season less than two months away, the entities are all looking for clients right now so here’s some things to consider if you’re looking into investing.

    The Entity

    From the entity side, the application process is the initial step and it’s reportedly far from a rubber stamp. Many have submitted applications but only a few have been approved, with less than 10% of those applying so far having been given the green light. Nevada currently has nine authorized betting entities but that count will almost certainly rise by the start of football. The application process is somewhat invasive but if an entity gets approved then the hunt is on for investors. The entire Bill 443 lays out what’s required to become an entity along with the dos and don’ts once in operation. Some of the don’ts carry significant penalties, many geared toward keeping the investors from having any input on what the entity invests in.

    Once you’re a state sanctioned entity, it’s then on to the task of raising funds through investors. A number of the entities have their own websites and there are also sites that will help you find an entity if you’re a prospective investor. At least one site will walk you through that process and submit your information to the state and the sports book. Then there are those who’s objective is to provide details on the entities so that investors can make an informed choice. Sites likeWagerTraders, run by Las Vegan Todd Hendricks, aim to be an information portal for the entity business. It’s a good place to start your research if you’re looking at investing in entity betting. Affiliate deals are most likely in place, so it’s recommended that you follow up with your own research before finalizing selections.

    Senate Bill 443

    The Investor

    There’s an approval process from the investor side as well. Aside from choosing an entity to subscribe to, there’s an investor vetting procedure, which may include a background check, a verification of where the applicant’s funds originate, and possibly other details. This information is submitted to not only the state, but the sports books that are involved as well. There are KYC (Know Your Customer) regulations that must be adhered to and much of that is supplied to the sports books. The books want to know who’s investing and where the money being used to bet is coming from.

    Investment requirements vary. Minimum deposits start as low as $500 at the entityBettorInvestments and top out at $25,000 at NSIG so there’s an entity out there priced to fit every bankroll.

    If prospective investors aren’t already turned off by the application process then here are a few issues they may want to consider.

    Issue #1:

    CGTechnologies is the only book currently available to entity groups. Perhaps other books will participate down the road, but for 2016 it looks like it’s just CGT. The obvious problem with this is that you have one line and one line only to bet into. It’s the elephant in the room when it comes to entity betting and it’s a really big elephant.

    There’s not a professional sports bettor I know, or have ever heard of, who has just one out. This isn’t a minor detail, it’s a huge negative component in the equation that cannot be dismissed. Beating sports requires resources, meaning you need to be well-funded and with as many outs as possible. Of those two, the number of outs should be the first priority. With just one place to bet, you’d better hope the house is as weak as the corner bookie using the local newspaper spreads, which CGT certainly is not.

    There are 20 different sets of lines in Nevada. Entities and their investors get access to just one, so they’re able to wager their bankroll vertically (bet high) but are blocked from spreading their bets horizontally (line shopping) due to the current conditions of having access to just one out. Right now, entities must take it or leave it as far as the lines they bet into.

    From time to time I get approached by sports bettors looking for advice on making the jump from serious recreational bettor to professional. The first thing that’s always recommended is to get as many good outs as possible. So the #1 thing on the to-do list for a successful advantage bettor is the one thing that an entity is incapable of doing. Not a good start.

    Issue #2:

    Fees. How much does it cost to take part in an entity? They all have different rates, time frames, minimum deposits, and collection schedules. All fees are non-refundable and while some of the fee set-ups are predicated on showing a profit, it’s still a total freeroll for the entity, especially when you factor in what could be unfavorable settle increments. In the “we only charge a fee when we win” claim, it may appear that if the entity wins, the investors win too — but that’s not necessarily the case. If they win, you MAY win — or you may not.

    At a 30% commission rate settled monthly, a two-month stretch of +40,000 and -40,000 would cost the investors $12,000 in commissions, even though the fund breaks even on the bets. Are you beginning to see the hill that an investor must climb to make money? A winning record isn’t really an indicator of profitability for the client. You have to determine if the entity can win enough so that there’s some profit left for the investors. A six-settle-period run of +30,000, +20,000, +80,000, -50,000, +20,000, and -60,000 is an overall win of +40,000. But after the commissions of 30% per winning period, the investors are paying $45,000 in commissions. So what many would consider a pretty successful overall result merely gets the investor close to breakeven. The entity collects $45,000 in commissions on the four winning segments and sends nothing back on the two segments that lost. Your settle points matter and making up losses is not part of any entity settle details that I’ve examined yet.

    Period Result Commission Net For Investor
    Period 1 +$30,000 -$9,000 +$21,000
    Period 2 +$20,000 -$6,000 +$35,000
    Period 3 +$80,000 -$24,000 +$91,000
    Period 4 -60,000 zero +$31,000
    Period 5 +20,000 -$6,000 +$45,000
    Period 6 -50,000 zero -$5,000
    Totals +40,000 -$45,000 -$5,000

    These are just a couple examples used to illustrate the effect commissions can have on an investors end result. There’s a little more to it than that and not every entity uses that commission format, but the advantage that the entity holds is obvious. The settle timeframes and sample sizes within those timeframes will dictate how big an advantage they actually have more than any other component. A bad commission structure makes it virtually impossible for an investor to realize a long-term profit.

    In addition to the commission, some entities also have deposit and withdrawal fees and others may restrict your withdrawals to specific parts of the calendar. At least one entity I looked at limits withdrawals to just twice per year, so you may be locked in for as long as six months. It’s all in the details when investing with an entity, so doing your homework and understanding what the fees and terms of those fees mean is critical to making an informed decision on whether or not to get involved.

    Issue #3:

    It’s the perfect tout vehicle. The similarities between the entity business and the tout business are numerous. Both allow for unverified claims of expertise at a level that the customer should be willing to pay for. Both get paid largely on volume and do not necessarily have to win for the client to turn a profit for themselves. Also, the advertising aspect is currently unregulated. Claims are being made on the basis of “projected growth rate” and previous records that are difficult to document. Some advertise records based on simulations and not actual results. Once again, it’s up to investors to navigate through all of this and decide what matters and what doesn’t when selecting where to invest.

    The whole topic of documentation and full transparency regarding past results is a real problem for the entities. A big determining factor in their success or failure will be the ability to compete with the others for investors. If only verified entity records are allowed to be touted, then it reduces the situation to a survival-of-the-fittest scenario. The ones who compile the best records early will naturally have a leg up on the ones with inferior records as well as any start-up entities with no records at all. As the law stands right now, no requirements are in force regarding how they fish for investors. According to the entities, you’re no longer gambling, though — you’re investing, which is a distinction without a difference some would say, and the type of come-on touts like to use if they can sell it. The ability to use terms like “state-sanctioned” and “gaming approved” adds a perceived air of legitimacy to these groups. Seeing those terms thrown around while searching for info on an entity may lead you to make certain assumptions as to the results and projections being cited.

    The vast majority of touts run from accurate record-keeping and reporting like a vampire fleeing sunshine. Will the entities adopt the same MO as the touts and, more important, will the state have any say on how an entity presents itself? It’s a topic that regulators probably didn’t give much thought to when drafting the law, but may have to look at if things start getting out of hand. When thought fully through, it’s something of a Catch-22 for the state. Allowing only verified records accumulated as an entity will most likely be a death sentence to a group that starts out on a bad run. Just like in the tout business, full transparency will almost certainly not be good for business.

    In all fairness, you can understand the entities predicament when it comes to records. A good short-term record doesn’t actually prove much, but neither does a poor record. The reality is there’s not a whole lot to go on if the entities aren’t willing to divulge details on their methodology. Stating that their selection process is based on proprietary algorithms and computer modeling is in the same ballpark as the touts saying they have a team of top handicappers and inside industry sources. Both sound good — one just sounds more technical. Neither really tells you anything, though, and in the end it’s the seller telling the buyer “just trust me”.

    Which direction the advertising aspect heads will probably be the most interesting thing to watch as entity betting moves forward. How tout-like will this all get and how involved will the state eventually be in governing an area that will be very tough to control?

    Senate Bill 443 was passed with the same general intent as other Gaming regulations. To provide the state of Nevada with tax revenue while establishing guidelines for the casinos to operate games that are deemed fair to the public and at the same time allowing the house to turn a profit. Nowhere in there is the intended result for the players to win. After all, it’s still gambling and it’s still a zero sum game. If someone wins then someone has to lose. There are four participants in the profit equation — state, entity, sports book, and investor. They’re listed in that order for a good reason. Put another way, all four can’t win.

    In Part Two I’ll look at the actual commissions, fees, and timetables the various entities are using and build a comparison chart. Then I’ll discuss what it takes to churn a profit betting sports and exactly how well the entities will have to perform to accomplish that for their investors.

    Htw

    Strong (#12, 5/2), trained by Todd A. Pletcher, finished 3rd Belmont Park onSunday, September 18th, 2016 in Race 4. – View Charts

     

    Three Eighty Eight (#14, 4/1), trained by Linda Rice, was scratched fromBelmont Park on Sunday, September 18th, 2016 in Race 5. – View Charts
     

    Eloquent Riddle (#4, 8/1), trained by Chad C. Brown, finished 1st Belmont Parkon Sunday, September 18th, 2016 in Race 6. – View Charts
     

    Spirit of the Dawn (#1, 8/1), trained by Todd A. Pletcher, finished 8th Belmont Park on Sunday, September 18th, 2016 in Race 6. – View Charts
     

    Just Talkin (#1, 3/1), trained by Chad C. Brown, finished 5th Belmont Park onSunday, September 18th, 2016 in Race 8. – View Charts
     

    Quinta Verde (IRE) (#7, 5/2), trained by Chad C. Brown, finished 2nd Belmont Park on Sunday, September 18th, 2016 in Race 8. – View Charts
     

    Erik the Red (#9, 5/1), trained by Linda Rice, finished 3rd Belmont Park onSunday, September 18th, 2016 in Race 9. – View Charts
     

    Sharaun (#14, 5/2), trained by Jerry Hollendorfer, was scratched from Golden Gate Fields on Sunday, September 18th, 2016 in Race 5. – View Charts
     

    Anythingscookin (#3, 7/2), trained by Jerry Hollendorfer, finished 1st Golden Gate Fields on Sunday, September 18th, 2016 in Race 7. – View Charts
     

    Big League (#2, 4/5), trained by Peter Miller, finished 3rd Los Alamitos Tb onSunday, September 18th, 2016 in Race 8 (Barretts Juvenile S.). – View Charts
     

    California Diamond (#5, 9/5), trained by Peter Miller, finished 1st Los Alamitos Tb on Sunday, September 18th, 2016 in Race 8 (Barretts Juvenile S.). – View Charts
     

    Mystery Solved (#5, 2/1), ridden by Paco Lopez, was scratched from Parx Racing on Sunday, September 18th, 2016 in Race 3. – View Charts
     

    Shuffle Up (#6, 8/5), ridden by Paco Lopez, finished 5th Parx Racing onSunday, September 18th, 2016 in Race 5. – View Charts
     

    Came Back (#1, 2/1), ridden by Paco Lopez, was scratched from Parx Racingon Sunday, September 18th, 2016 in Race 7. – View Charts
     

    Not a Chance (#1A, 2/1), ridden by Paco Lopez, finished 3rd Parx Racing onSunday, September 18th, 2016 in Race 7. – View Charts
     

    Beat the Benchmark (#8, 4/1), trained by Chad C. Brown, finished 3rdWoodbine on Sunday, September 18th, 2016 in Race 8 (Natalma S.). – View Charts
     

    Harlan’s Holiday Colt Too ‘Good’ in Summer

    WEG

    6th at WO , Gr. Stk, $200,000GII Summer S.(1m)Winner: Good Samaritan, c, 2 by Harlan’s Holiday

    Good Samaritan Michael Burns

    Good Samaritan took his record to a perfect two-for-two Sunday, following a professional debut graduation with his first graded tally in this “Win and You’re In” event for the GI Breeders’ Cup Juvenile Turf. Breaking sharply, the bay was rated back to trail the field early as 60-1 shot The Craic (Sidney’s Candy) and fellow New York invader Harlan’s Harmony (Spring At Last) duked it out through early fractions of :23.21 and :46.01. Patiently handled by pilot Joel Rosario, Good Samaritan was inched closer on the backstretch and swung out six wide to launch a bid turning for home. Powering down the center of the course, the juvenile swiftly inhaled his rivals and cruised clear under a hand ride to win as he pleased.

    “He’s very professional,” said Rosario, who also was aboard for Good Samaritan’s debut win. “When he starts running he’s very focused–when I rode him last time he was the same way. He’s shown that he had a lot of talent. He may have a good future.”

    Overlooked at 9-1 in his 1 1/16-mile unveiling over the Saratoga lawn, Good Samaritan raced three deep early before tucking in to save ground near the back of the pack and closed strongly in the lane to get up just in time for a head success. He was one of three juvenile winners at the Saratoga meet for the partnership between China Horse Club and WinStar Farm, which started with GI Champagne S. winner Daredevil (More Than Ready) last year. They were also represented at the Spa by the Todd Pletcher-trained duo of “TDN Rising Star” Theory (Gemologist) and One Liner (Into Mischief). The powerhouse partnership have been steadily expanding their stable at the still ongoing Keeneland September sale with nine yearlings purchased so far for a total of $3.935 million (Click here for sale story).

    Pedigree Notes…

    Bred by co-owner WinStar Farm, Good Samaritan hails from the family of MGSWs Wiseman’s Ferry (Hennessy) and Caress (Storm Cat), the sam of GISW sire Sky Mesa (Pulpit). He is the third foal out the stakes-placed Pull Dancer, who has since produced a yearling colt by Pioneerof the Nile and a weanling filly by Tiznow. She was bred back to Bodemeister.

    Sunday, Woodbine
    SUMMER S.-GII, C$206,400, WO, 9-18, 2yo, 1mT, 1:34.38, fm.
    1–#@GOOD SAMARITAN, 122, c, 2, by Harlan’s Holiday
    1st Dam: Pull Dancer, by Pulpit
    2nd Dam: Mayhavebeentheone, by Arch
    3rd Dam: Emmaus, by Silver Deputy
    O-China Horse Club Ltd & WinStar Farm Ltd; B-WinStar Farm LLC (KY); T-William I Mott; J-Joel Rosario. C$120,000. Lifetime Record: 2-2-0-0, $140,616. Click for the eNicks report & 5-cross pedigree. Werk Nick Rating: A.
    2–Conquest Farenheit, 122, c, 2, Scat Daddy–Holy Smokie, by Holy Bull. ($130,000 Ylg ’15 FTKOCT). O-Conquest Stables LLC; B-Meadow Lane Stables LLC (KY); T-Mark E Casse. C$40,000.
    3–Channel Maker, 122, g, 2, English Channel–In Return, by Horse Chestnut (SAf). ($57,000 RNA Ylg ’15 KEESEP). O-Joey Gee Thoroughbreds; B-Tall Oaks Farm (ON); T-Daniel J. Vella. C$26,400.
    Margins: 1HF, 1HF, HD. Odds: 3.00, 0.95, 14.00.
    Also Ran: Tiz a Slam, Harlan’s Harmony, Conquest Sure Shot, The Craic.
    Click for the Equibase.com chart, theTJCIS.com PPs or the free Equineline.com catalogue-style pedigreeVIDEO, sponsored by Fasig-Tipton.

     

    ‘Riddle’ Me This, Harlan’s Holiday Filly Proves Best at Big Sandy

    Sunday, September 18, 2016 

    6th at Bel, Msw, $75,000 Maiden Special Weight (6 1/2f) Winner: Eloquent Riddle, f, 2 by Harlan’s Holiday

    eloquentriddleacwb

    Eloquent Riddle | Coglianese Photography

    6th-BEL, $75,000, Msw, 9-18, 2yo, f, 6 1/2f, 1:16.95, ft.
    +ELOQUENT RIDDLE (f, 2, Harlan’s Holiday–Comic Marvel, by Distorted Humor) who sported a string of works dating back to early August at Belmont, was sent off at 5-1 in this debut. In a tracking fifth through an opening quarter in :22.07, the Juddmonte homebred saved all the ground at the fence and pilot Javier Castellano was sitting on go and only lacked racing room after a half mile in :45.61. Eloquent Riddle angled off the rail in upper stretch, split horses inside the final 100 yards and kicked clear to win by 2 3/4 lengths over 34-1 Naples Princess (Distorted Humor). Eloquent Riddle’s second dam is Media Nox (GB) (Lycius), a group/graded winner in France and the U.S. whose daughter Nebraska Tornado (Storm Cat) won the G1 Prix de Diane in 2003. Media Nox is also the dam of Mirabilis (Lear Fan), winner of the 2006 Churchill Distaff Turf Mile while under the care of Bobby Frankel. Comic Marvel is the sam of a yearling colt by Malibu Moon, a weanling filly by City Zip and was most recently bred back to Malibu Moon. Lifetime Record: 1-1-0-0, $45,000. Click for theEquibase.com chart or VIDEO, sponsored by Fasig-Tipton.
    O/B-Juddmonte Farms Inc (KY); T-Chad C Brown.

    Awesome Again Firster Up Late at Laurel

    8th at LRL, Msw, $40,000 (1m) Winner: Too Awesome, c, 2 by Awesome Again

    AwesomeAgainLouiseReinagel

    Awesome Again Louise Reinagel

    8th-LRL, $40,000, Msw, 9-18, 2yo, 1m, 1:40.76, ft.
    +TOO AWESOME (c, 2, Awesome Again–Awesome Ashley {MSW, $303,260}, by Unbridled’s Song) came with a determined closing kick to get up and graduate on debut at Laurel. Off as the 7-2 third choice, the homebred settled second-last as favored Good Boy Lucas (Creative Cause) hooked up with Cats Serenade (Overdriven) through strong splits of :23.71 and :47.88. Too Awesome began to advance along the inside on the turn, but appeared to have too much to do until the favorite, who’d won the pace battle, started to get leg-weary in the final furlong. Continuing to grind away to that one’s inside, the dark bay surged by in the final 100 yards to win going away by two lengths. The winner’s dam was a three-time stakes winner, while second dam, Queens Court Queen (Lyphard), was a MGISW. Awesome Ashley is the dam of a yearling colt by Scat Daddy, a weanling filly by Uncle Mo and was bred back to that leading sire. Lifetime Record: 1-1-0-0, $22,800.Click for the Equibase.com chart or VIDEO, sponsored by Fasig-Tipton.
    O/B-Alex G Campbell Jr Thoroughbreds LLC (KY); T-H. Graham Motion.

    WHO NEEDS MSW TO MDNCLM. VICTORY BY MDN ^to graded stakes. CASSE FILLY BREAKS MAIDEN IN STYLE  8TH AT WO , GR. STK, $250,000GI NATALMA S.(1M)WINNER: VICTORY TO VICTORY, F, 2 BY EXCHANGE RATE                                     VICTORY TO VICTORY.                                     

    Casse Filly Scores First ‘Victory’ in Natalma

    8th at WO , Gr. Stk, $250,000GI Natalma S.(1m)Winner: Victory to Victory, f, 2 by EXCHANGE rate

                           Victory to Victory.                         

    One day after champion Tepin (Bernstein)’s victory in the GI Ricoh Woodbine Mile, Live Oak Plantation homebred Victory to Victory(Exchange Rate) capped off a stellar weekend at Woodbine for Canadian Hall of Famer Mark Casse Sunday by breaking her maiden in the newly-upgraded GI Natalma S. under Florent Geroux. Casse and Geroux teamed up to win last year’s renewal of this event with Catch a Glimpse (City Zip), who won the GI Breeders’ Cup Juvenile Fillies Turf next out and was named Canadian Horse of the Year. Adding blinkers for this “Win and You’re In” event for that Breeders’ Cup test, Victory to Victory, who was one of four Casse runners in this test, broke sharply from post 13 in this 14-horse affair and settled to track from a dual fourth as headstrong longshot Will She (Wando) ticked off sharp opening splits of :22.69 and :45.37. Ranging up about six wide turning for home, the chestnut stuck her nose in front halfway down the lane, kept on finding to put away Stormy Perfection in the final furlong and rolled clear to earn her diploma in style.

    “I think the blinkers made a big difference today,” said assistant trainer Norm Casse, who saddled both Tepin and Victory to Victory for his father after plane trouble caused him to miss his trip from the Keeneland September Sale in Lexington to Woodbine. “We knew she was a very talented horse, and she’s finally starting to figure things out.”

    “She broke very sharply from the gate,” said Geroux. “From there we got a nice position, without taking any bumping or anything. Turning for home she gave me a very nice kick.”

    Rallying to be fifth after a trouble trip when unveiled in a Saratoga turf sprint Aug. 12, Victory to Victory split the reopposing Tapa Tapa Tapa(Tapit) and Stormy Perfection when second next out in a seven-panel allowance over this course Aug. 27.

    Pedigree Notes…

    Charlotte Weber’s Live Oak Plantation purchased the winner’s dam Points of Grace for just $170,000 as a yearling at the Fasig-Tipton August sale and she went on to win the 2009 GII Dance Smartly S., that year’s Sovereign Award as the country’s best grass mare and over a half-million dollars. Victory to Victory is the mare’s third and most recent foal. Points of Grace was sold for just $30,000 at last year’s Keeneland November sale after failing to get in foal to Into Mischief and she was most recently bred to Amira’s Prince (Ire). Victory to Victory also hails from the family of Group 1 winner Favourable Terms (GB) (Selkirk).

     Sunday, Woodbine

    NATALMA S.-GI, C$253,400, WO, 9-18, 2yo, f, 1mT, 1:35.24, fm.
    1–#@&VICTORY TO VICTORY, 121, f, 2, by Exchange Rate
    1st Dam: Points of Grace (Ch. Turf Mare-Can, GSW, $502,353), by Point Given
    2nd Dam: Fateful, by Topsider
    3rd Dam: Fate’s Reward, by Key to the Mint
    O-Live Oak Plantation; B-Live Oak Stud (FL); T-Mark E. Casse; J-Florent Geroux. C$150,000. Lifetime Record: 3-1-1-0, $127,468. Werk Nick Rating: C+. Click for the eNicks report & 5-cross pedigree.
    2–Stormy Perfection, 121, f, 2, Tale of the Cat–Silent Perfection, by Perfect Soul (Ire). O/B-Charles E Fipke (KY); T-Michael J Doyle. C$50,000.
    3–Beat the Benchmark, 121, f, 2,Speightstown–Tabarin, by El Prado (Ire). ($300,000 Ylg ’15 FTSAUG). O-Klaravich Stables Inc & William H Lawrence; B-Dixiana Farms LLC (KY); T-Chad C Brown. C$25,000.
    Margins: 2HF, 1HF, 2HF. Odds: 7.85, 14.05, 4.25.
    Also Ran: Thora Barber (GB), Erin Commodity, Tapa Tapa Tapa, Black Canary, Cold Hearted Pearl, Lapinski, I’ll Take the Cake, Conquest Rapiduno, Red Lodge, Will She, Enstone. Scratched: The Craic.
    Click for the Equibase.com chart, theTJCIS.com PPs or the free Equineline.com catalogue-style pedigreeVIDEO, sponsored by Fasig-Tipton.

    YOUR RACING CALENDAR THROUGH SEPTEMBER TO OPENING DAY SANTA ANITA PARK

    SEP

    12

    Mon

    2016

    Keeneland September Yearling Sale

    Sep 12 – Sep 24

    click here for more information

     CATEGORIES:  SALES

    SEP

    20

    Tue

    2016

    Tattersalls Ireland September Yearling Sale

    Sep 20 – Sep 21

    click here for more information

     CATEGORIES:  SALES

    SEP

    21

    Wed

    2016

    Opening Day @ Stockton

    Sep 21

     CATEGORIES:  OPENING DAY

    SEP

    22

    Thu

    2016

    Tattersalls Ireland September Yearling Sale Part II

    Sep 22

    click here for more information

     CATEGORIES:  SALES

    SEP

    24

    Sat

    2016

    $1,000,000 (USD) G1 Cotillion S. @ Parx

    Sep 24

     CATEGORIES:  RACING

    $1,000,000 (USD) G2 Pennsylvania Derby @ Parx

    Sep 24

     CATEGORIES:  RACING

    $500,000 (AUD) GI Underwood S. @ Caulfield

    Sep 24

     CATEGORIES:  RACING

    Closing Day @ Louisiana Downs

    Sep 24

     CATEGORIES:  CLOSING DAY

    £180,000 (GBP) GI Connolly’s Red Mills Cheveley Park S. @ Newmarket

    Sep 24

     CATEGORIES:  RACING

    £180,000 (GBP) GI Juddmonte Middle Park S. @ Newmarket

    Sep 24

     CATEGORIES:  RACING

    $500,000 (AUD) GI Sir Rupert Clarke S. @ Caulfield

    Sep 24 @ 6:27 pm – 7:27 pm

     CATEGORIES:  RACING

    SEP

    25

    Sun

    2016

    Closing Day @ Albuquerque

    Sep 25

     CATEGORIES:  CLOSING DAY

    Closing Day @ Arlington International Racecourse

    Sep 25

     CATEGORIES:  CLOSING DAY

    Closing Day @ Los Alamitos Race Course

    Sep 25

     CATEGORIES:  CLOSING DAY

    Closing Day @ Monmouth Park

    Sep 25

     CATEGORIES:  CLOSING DAY

    Opening day @ Portland Meadows

    Sep 25

     CATEGORIES:  OPENING DAY

    €155,000 (EUR) GI 54th Preis Von Europa @ Koln

    Sep 25

     CATEGORIES:  RACING

    €275,000 (EUR) GI Premio Vittorio Di Capua @ Milan

    Sep 25

     CATEGORIES:  RACING

    SEP

    26

    Mon

    2016

    International Simulcast Conference @ Harrah’s New Orleans Hotel & Casino

    Sep 26 – Sep 28

     CATEGORIES:  EVENTS

    SEP

    27

    Tue

    2016

    Goffs Orby Sale

    Sep 27 – Sep 28

    click here for more information

     CATEGORIES:  SALES

    SEP

    29

    Thu

    2016

    Arqana Purebred Arabian Sale

    Sep 29

    click here for more information

     CATEGORIES:  SALES

    Goffs Sportsman’s Sale

    Sep 29 – Sep 30

    click here for more information

     CATEGORIES:  SALES

    SEP

    30

    Fri

    2016

    Opening Day @ Santa Anita Park

    Sep 30

     CATEGORIES:  OPENING DAY

    $500,000 (AUD) GI A J Moir S. @ Moonee Valley

    Sep 30 @ 6:29 pm – 7:29 pm

     CATEGORIES:  RACING