Not that there's anything wrong with the Daily Racing Form, it's been my source for thoroughbred past performances since I was 10-years-old. (It was difficult to place bets at age 10 but that's why uncle Gordy existed.)

Not that there's anything wrong with the Daily Racing Form, but unless I run into that British guy with the lamb chop sideburns, I may as well be reading the London Times arts section when in pursuit of information on the European runners.

Sure, the Breeders' Cup pre-entry edition of the Form drew up some nice historical essays about the various European tracks. For instance, I am now aware that Newmarket has been running since March 8, 1622. All the losers got on the Mayflower.

I also know that Ascot was founded by Queen Anne in 1711 after she purchased the property after a stag hunt.

What is a stag hunt? And what's a queen doing in one?

All of the above is like a headline from USA Today when compared with the archival information found on York.

That joint was throwing races in 1530. Put that in Andrew Beyer's pipe and smoke it.

But even as a lover of history -- I dig the History Channel; It's great every time we kick Germany's ass -- the actual past performance charts relative to the European runners leave me out in the dark like an animal rights activist at a dog track.

Would it be too much for the Europeans to provide us with small details such as how their races were run?

As an example, that world-beater Rock of Gibraltar carries the following running style information in the DRF: He wins a lot.

Well thanks, my British pals, but it would prove beneficial also to have a few more notes. Things such as which horse led at the half mile.

Indeed, on the far right column, we are treated to a tidy 10 to 14 word description (to wit: rated in 5th, bid over 1f out, struck by foe's whip, led 100 yd out).

Of course, there's no byline. This ain't the New York Times.

How do I know the writer wasn't also trying to beat some deadline on his masterful description regarding another runner?

Tracked leaders. Outfinished.

Is there some kind of worldwide ink shortage? Would it be too much to ask that the Europeans fill in a few blanks?

Maybe it's not even their fault. Maybe the DRF figures we're so confused by the Europeans in general that cluttering the form with excess information wouldn't serve the public anyway.

Or, maybe there's some metric conversion issue, far too difficult to translate.

Who knows? Who cares? It's good to have the blokes back with us for a day.

I wish them well. As for the Brits in particular, they're our only dependable ally. Who am I to quibble over some missing type?

But if the final comment on my Breeders' Cup day reads "dull effort," it won't be for lack of information on the American horses.

After all, Andy Beyer comes in bold print.

By the way, just so you know, I'm going to the track on first-time lasix. What European would cough up that kind of info?

Clearing the air about Breeders' Cup Favorites
Looking back on all the past Breeders' Cup races I noted something: The favorites usually suck.

So, there it is, after exhaustive research on all the past Breeders' Cup races, I can recommend that you don't bet on favorites.

Of course, this will be the year the chalk goes 8 for 8. But the point of this racing thing is to use past performance as a guide and it is a facts that the payoffs aren't typically 80-1.

Just to prove my point, last year at Belmont only one race paid off a winning ticket at lower than 5-1. That's all the historical research I'm willing to provide. If you don't like it, consult Hank Goldberg or Randy Moss.

But there is deeper research to do and this goes way back to the original Breeders' Cup in 1984.

To protect the woman's identity, (and just so I'm not sued in that this is the year I'll hit the Pick 6) I'll make up a name for her. Let's call her "wife of rich horse owner."

Many years after rich horse owner and wife of rich horse owner competed in that original Cup, I had occasion to meet wife of rich horse owner. It was minutes after I'd hosted the Eclipse Awards in Los Angeles.

I stepped outside to grab some air. Just then, Muhammad Ali walked by. This has nothing to do with racing other than the fact he's from Kentucky. But how do I let a meeting with the champ go undocumented?

Ali entered the hotel and crossed paths with wife of rich horse owner.

Wife of Rich Horse Owner: You caught me.

Me: Caught you what?

Wife: Caught me smoking.

Me: Smoke 'em if you got 'em.

Wife: I'm not supposed to be smoking.

Me: Well, if you want to hide your habit, not that I want to enable you, but there's a corridor over there leading to a swimming pool. You can smoke like Bob Marley.

Wife: Over where?

Me: Follow me.

It was at this point I questioned whether this was my best PR move, leading the wife of a rich horse owner into a darkened corridor. But it was with good intentions.

So I took her to the ad-hoc smokers' lounge, wished her well and advised her to join a 12-step program.

As I walked away I noticed the pool was under repair. It was a 15-foot drop to cement.

Headline: ESPN anchor leads wife of rich horse owner to her demise. Smoking blamed.

So I went back to check on her welfare.

Headline: ESPN anchor seen with wife of rich horse owner. Smoking blamed.

Ultimately it never made the papers. She finished her cigs, escaped injury and returned to her rich husband. He was smoking a cigar. At least I think he was. The room was cloudy with smoke.