Derby Trail Forums
Page 4 of 5 « First < 23 4 5 >
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Derby Trail Forums (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/index.php)
-   The Charles Hatton Reading Room (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=11)
-   -   Why Andy Beyer is a Legend (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=22781)

ShadowRoll 05-27-2008 01:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind
As many of you know, Andy Beyer went to South America this winter to take a stab at South American racing. He spent hours making figs for their races and was unfortunately faced with a huge takeout and miniscule pools that made real wagering virtually impossible. But, while it was a great exercise and a fun time, until today it was also a financial waste of time.

While riding the train out to Belmont today I got a call from Andy telling me he was making a huge bet at Belmont. Now, this is the time that I would usually be smart to hang up and tell him I lost service, but recklessly I allowed him to go further. In the second race, an extraordinarily weak maiden race, Andy told me that #4 Emotival was his huge bet. Three races back in Argentina Emotival had finished a close third and Andy had given him a figure of 77 which towered over today's field. Two back when he finished fifth at 1 1/8 miles ( today's race was a mile ) the horse had been right there in midstretch and last time when he faltered badly at 1 1/4 miles he had been scorched in a torrid speed duel. He said he was fully confident in the 77 figure and considering today's field he was sending it in. That was good enough for me and I followed suit.

Emotival, if you don't know, paid $21 after holding off the odds on favorite....and Beyer was repaid for his hours of work in preparation for his South American adventure. At a time when having an edge using speed figures is virtually non-existant, Andy Beyer did the near impossible, and for a few minutes turned back the clock.
In my head, the archetypical image of the horseplayer is a man, with equal parts hubris and a puckish impulse to annoy those around him, screaming, at the top of his lungs, "I'm the KING OF THE WORLD!" after making a big score.

I appreciated your story. Thanks.

hockey2315 05-27-2008 01:35 PM
If I had $500 I'd put $500 on the horse to win. Why key it in 2nd and 3rd? If you think the horse is a lock to win then that's just a waste of $. I understand the idea of giving yourself a little insurance if then horse runs well but doesn't win or if he has a bad trip but still gets a piece because he's the best horse - but you can't try to over-hedge things in this case - you go for the big/sure score. And why risk being wrong about other legs of a PK4 that you almost definitely have a less strong opinion on?

Your way: $2327.50 + 2596 + $300 + $290 = $5513.50

and that assumes that you hit every bet - which in this case is far from definite and not worth the risk when you consider that if you just played the horse to win for $500 you'd get back $5250.

Is the extra $263.50 really worth the increased risk? No way. Not to mention that you also have to worry about tax stuff your way. . .

Scav 05-27-2008 01:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockey2315
If I had $500 I'd put $500 on the horse to win. Why key it in 2nd and 3rd? If you think the horse is a lock to win then that's just a waste of $. I understand the idea of giving yourself a little insurance if then horse runs well but doesn't win or if he has a bad trip but still gets a piece because he's the best horse - but you can't try to over-hedge things in this case - you go for the big/sure score. And why risk being wrong about other legs of a PK4 that you almost definitely have a less strong opinion on?

Your way: $2327.50 + 2596 + $300 + $290 = $5513.50

and that assumes that you hit every bet - which in this case is far from definite and not worth the risk when you consider that if you just played the horse to win for $500 you'd get back $5250.

Is the extra $263.50 really worth the increased risk? No way. Not to mention that you also have to worry about tax stuff your way. . .
It is $40, or 8% of investment.

As far as your comment on the P4 is concerned, the power of having a $20 winner IN THE FIRST LEG of a P4 is HUGE. The first leg has the most information available for the uninformed.

As far as I am concerned, a P4 is a must play there because of the potential to spread in the other three races, and the LARGE potential of a p4 payout. With a win wager, you are maximized at a $20 payout on that win wager, on the P4 play, you can really make a huge score.

I am not saying to ignore the win wager completely, because that would be moronic.

the_fat_man 05-27-2008 01:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockey2315
If I had $500 I'd put $500 on the horse to win.
If I like a horse and it's decent odds (>5:1), I would also just bet it to win.

If there's a strong favorite in the race, I'll play a small saver exacta UNDER the favorite.

Spreading works real well when EVERYTHING works out.

I don't understand why I need to SPREAD when my strong opinion is in THIS race, not subsequent or previous ones. If, however, I have strong opinions in those races, of course I go exotics.

smuthg 05-27-2008 01:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scav
If I had $500, I would have played it this way

1) Singled in a P4 ticket that (1x3x4x5) ($60)
2) Tri key in all three spots with 5 other horses (x2) ($120)
3) Exacta key with 5 horses, back wheel for less ($10 on top, $5 behind) ($75)
4) Win money ($245)

Total of $500
So assuming you hit all of those, by my math, that's approx. $8,400 on a $500 bet... not too bad.

Scav 05-27-2008 02:02 PM
I have to be honest in that I hope Andy talks about how he played it because I don't think alot of people know how to actually play a horse that they love, or get worthwhile information on. Matter of fact, I screwed up this weekend with Much Obliged, I should have crushed her, crushed that race matter of fact, and I got a measley win bet on her.

hockey2315 05-27-2008 02:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scav
As far as your comment on the P4 is concerned, the power of having a $20 winner IN THE FIRST LEG of a P4 is HUGE. The first leg has the most information available for the uninformed.
I think it's the opposite, scav. The fact that the winner took so much money probably made him an include on lots of tickets that wouldn't have had him otherwise. If they had to bet blindly into that leg of the PK4 chances are they'd be much less likely to include an unknown commodity and would be more likely to just use the horses that they had a better read on. If we say the horse was 10-1 in the PK4 with the race being where it was R2/Leg 1, he'd probably be at least double that in the last leg.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scav
As far as I am concerned, a P4 is a must play there because of the potential to spread in the other three races, and the LARGE potential of a p4 payout. With a win wager, you are maximized at a $20 payout on that win wager, on the P4 play, you can really make a huge score.
The Pk4 is only a must play without budgetary constraints. The PK4 structure that you suggested doesn't give enough coverage to make it worth it if you're only betting $500. 3X4X5 just isn't going to work - either you're constrained to using a lot of favorites - opening yourself up to a chalk out, or you're not using chalkier horses and decreasing your chances of hitting it.

hockey2315 05-27-2008 02:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by smuthg
So assuming you hit all of those, by my math, that's approx. $8,400 on a $500 bet... not too bad.
Not by my math. . .

Scav 05-27-2008 02:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockey2315
I think it's the opposite, scav. The fact that the winner took so much money probably made him an include on lots of tickets that wouldn't have had him otherwise. If they had to bet blindly into that leg of the PK4 chances are they'd be much less likely to include an unknown commodity and would be more likely to just use the horses that they had a better read on. If we say the horse was 10-1 in the PK4 with the race being where it was R2/Leg 1, he'd probably be at least double that in the last leg.



The Pk4 is only a must play without budgetary constraints. The PK4 structure that you suggested doesn't give enough coverage to make it worth it if you're only betting $500. 3X4X5 just isn't going to work - either you're constrained to using a lot of favorites - opening yourself up to a chalk out, or you're not using chalkier horses and decreasing your chances of hitting it.
You are giving people too much credit in watching the board.

lets take said sequence into considering. You have this Emotivoal horse, and then you have an 8 horse field, 11 horse field, and 9 horse field......I think you could have easily went 3 deep in the 2nd leg, 5 deep in the 3rd leg, and 4 deep in the 4th leg....You would have had 38% of the field in the 2nd leg, 45% if the field in the 3rd leg, and 44% of the field in the last leg.

I would like to think that if I am giving myself the opportunity to split the field, that I can find the winner in my upper half.

We might just be too different players. Me personally, I would still have win money on the horse, but I would play some exotics to really crush the pools within that race, ESPECIALLY with a horse that is like this one, in the 8/1 - 15/1 range.

Scav 05-27-2008 02:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaHoss9698
Anyone else think the pick 4 was a tad low considering a prohibitive favorite was beat in the first and last leg? And the 4th was such a crapshoot.
Looking at it right now, I think the best payout surrounding the horse was the early DD. The others seem right around par with the favorite running 2nd

smuthg 05-27-2008 02:31 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockey2315
Not by my math. . .
I figured in a $2 Pick 4 and not a $1... At that number, I agree the win bet seems to make the most sense.

hockey2315 05-27-2008 02:32 PM
I disagree with 5 deep in the third leg - I know Fat Man loved the 1 but if you don't have that kind of opinion the race looks WIDE open. . . You've got the 1 (who I didn't personally like because he was a 12-time maiden), the 3 who was a first timer for turf sprint specialist Linda Rice, the 4 - a Pletcher cut-back with a huge Tomlinson, the 6 who showed a lot of speed last time and then died - but that was on yielding turf and Coa stayed, the 7 who was another hanger but had run very competitively in similar spots, the 8 whose a firster with some nice works from a trainer who has a great ROI with FTS, the 9 who was trained by Clement, and the 10 who didn't really run at all in his first race but now he gets blinkers and lasix.

That's 8 horses - not to mention that the odds-on favorite in the last leg finished last - a horse that many people probably singled or considered a stand-out.

The bottom line is that there's no reason to get greedy when you've already found great value - you have a free winner at 10-1!

Let's say that god/Andy Beyer (is there a difference?) told you that Emotival was definitely going to win - not just that he should win or that his odds didn't reflect his actual chances of winning. You have $500 and no knowledge of the rest of the order of finish or of how the other races will play out. You do, however, have access to all the handicapping materials you normally use. How would you use the $500?

Scav 05-27-2008 02:36 PM
It comes down to what you are content with? Me personally, i would have no problem with a $250 win wager on this horse, and getting knocked out of the others. At least I gave myself an opportunity to play around with good information into a 200k pool (Early P4 at NY) and other large pools, instead of topping out at 10/1.....

But again, it all depends on the person, the situation, and what they are content with.....

the_fat_man 05-27-2008 02:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaHoss9698
Anyone else think the pick 4 was a tad low considering a prohibitive favorite was beat in the first and last leg? And the 4th was such a crapshoot.
Depends on who you speak to about this one.

hoovesupsideyourhead 05-27-2008 02:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scav
I have to be honest in that I hope Andy talks about how he played it because I don't think alot of people know how to actually play a horse that they love, or get worthwhile information on. Matter of fact, I screwed up this weekend with Much Obliged, I should have crushed her, crushed that race matter of fact, and I got a measley win bet on her.
you really think he wants to open that can of worms........

hockey2315 05-27-2008 02:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scav
But again, it all depends on the person, the situation, and what they are content with.....
I guess it does - personally I can't understand why anyone would throw away free money for not so free money - even if there MAY be more of it. Seems sort of like people like my dad who wheel - "the exactas pay better than the win with everyone except for the 3 favorites" . . . O gee, I wonder why.

Scav 05-27-2008 02:45 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoovesupsideyourhead
you really think he wants to open that can of worms........
I am not asking for numbers, nor would I ever, but I don't find the question inappropiate

hoovesupsideyourhead 05-27-2008 02:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scav
I am not asking for numbers, nor would I ever, but I don't find the question inappropiate
true..but he shared this ..funny i had the horse myself..without andy b call..and the funny thing is he was the only other horse that looked like he might do ok vs pop rocker

hoovesupsideyourhead 05-27-2008 02:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoovesupsideyourhead
true..but he shared this ..funny i had the horse myself..without andy b call..and the funny thing is he was the only other horse that looked like he might do ok vs pop rocker
and scav ..you are a legend in your own right..


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:48 AM.
Page 4 of 5 « First < 23 4 5 >
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.