WO Sat Mdn Sp Wt.

[CSC]

Big fields, good betting opportunities that's Woodbine, I'll share this one:

Hawk On the Hunt is an interesting horse in the 5th if it stays on turf, I don't like betting entries as they are usually devalued, so hopefully the other half scratches but he is a horse I made a trip note on. Should move fwd. with added distance and cleaner trip.

Not an easy race as there are many possibilities so the value is there.

[hockey2315]

Same rider listed, so one should scratch. I hope you get your price, but I'd be surprised if they let a Smart Strike w/ that trouble line get away at the morning line or higher.

[the_fat_man]

I haven't looked at the race, so this horse can certainly win but it won't be because of his 'trip'. That trip is right out of the Eric Donovan trip handicapping school, where even the most trivial steadies or checks are considered a bad trip. I'm disappointed. With all the horrendous wide no cover and premature move trips at WO (this has to be the worst colony of jocks ever assembled), this is what we're focusing on?:rolleyes:

[hockey2315]

That was slightly more than a trivial check, but I agree with you that obvious trouble like this is never a source of value.

[the_fat_man]

The check was trivial.

[hockey2315]

Explain.

[the_fat_man]

The horse was in a perfect spot when the checks happened. It was not only BEHIND (a row) of horses but it was also BETWEEN horses (multiple, especially to its outside). Which means that there was a steady FLOW carrying it around the track. Now, when it checked, though it fell back slightly, it did NOT lose contact with the horses to its front or sides and thus was still within the pocket of flow. So, the check was negligible, as it didn't really lose much in terms of position or have to work harder to get back into the same position. Once clear, when they hit the stretch, this horse had nothing.

[hockey2315]

I understand the logic, but aren't you discounting the fact that the horse was a firster that was probably discouraged and couldn't win after that kind of trouble? He didn't have a trip in the sense that he had a bad set-up, was 5 wide around the turn, etc., but he still had a trip that prevented him from contending for the win. He's almost certainly a better horse than he was able to show in his debut and is bred for the stretch-out, but the problem is that anyone capable of reading the PPs will get that.

[the_fat_man]

I just think that following horses like this is basically a waste of time. It's the most basic level of trip handicapping. You can't win betting back horses that had trouble, IMO. How do I know? I'm an empiricist: 25+ years ago I was doing the same thing.

CSC picks some winners but his trip horses are all of the same type: horses that had trouble and failed to run next out.

[hockey2315]

I just think that following horses like this is basically a waste of time. It's the most basic level of trip handicapping. You can't win betting back horses that had trouble, IMO. How do I know? I'm an empiricist: 25+ years ago I was doing the same thing.


I agree with you there.

[CSC]

Same rider listed, so one should scratch. I hope you get your price, but I'd be surprised if they let a Smart Strike w/ that trouble line get away at the morning line or higher.

Honestly I never looked at the trouble line, the trip note was a mental note I had made from seeing the race on tape. The trouble line isn't helpful but here is what I wrote in my notes after the race ' Tough trip, mediocre ride in debut, more dist would be an advantage'. Regardless if one disagrees with the check he should like the stretchout to a mile.

[CSC]

The check was trivial.

Trivial? Really...

[the_fat_man]

Admissible in today's 4th also has a trouble line. Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Blocked Stretch; evened out.

Can we make a case for her?:rolleyes:

[CSC]

3/1 on Admissible is a trap unless he improves as a second time starter. I don't have a strong enough opinion on him to play this race as he is the only obvious alternative to the #1's. But goodluck to anyone who plays him, I always love seeing the 'chalk' fall.

Edit-Baytree is far more interesting IMO>

[hockey2315]

Honestly I never looked at the trouble line, the trip note was a mental note I had made from seeing the race on tape. The trouble line isn't helpful but here is what I wrote in my notes after the race ' Tough trip, mediocre ride in debut, more dist would be an advantage'. Regardless if one disagrees with the check he should like the stretchout to a mile.

I know you didn't. But that's the problem - even if you put in more work, watch races, etc... you're not going to get an edge on the public with horses like this because the chart caller is going to pick up on and make note of whatever you saw.

[CSC]

I know you didn't. But that's the problem - even if you put in more work, watch races, etc... you're not going to get an edge on the public with horses like this because they chart caller is going to pick up on and make note of whatever you saw.

True...We'll see what the odds are on him tommorow, it's a good betting race with many alternatives with realistic chances, which in my opinion is when you want to find a trip or forgotten horse. What I do know is I like him more than the probably favorite the Husbands/Pierce horse.

[hockey2315]

If the Casse firster gets completely ignored then maybe I'll throw a few $ on him.

[the_fat_man]

So, did Admissible win because of that BOGUS trouble line or because she's Equitable's baby half sister?:rolleyes:

[CSC]

Hawk On the Hunt is Scratched

Always Prince alternative pick.

[the_fat_man]

Hawk On the Hunt is Scratched

Always Prince alternative pick.

Ahh, the other trivial checker in the race.:rolleyes: This one was barely noticeable; even to Eric Donovan with a magnifying glass.

He ran 4 feet LESS than the winner btw. As a comparison, HotH ran 13 feet more than the winner and Hillswick ran 26 feet more.

This is a tough race.

[CSC]

Where's this Eric Donovan-ism come from? :zz: