It's just the way it is.

The old-time horse racing press would very commonly write about betting coups and putover situations involving barn money...even in big races.

It would often be written that a horse was either "the medium of a failed betting coup" if the horse with some insider money failed to win ... or it would be called a successful betting coup if the horse won.

There are hundreds and hundreds of examples of this I have seen...and you see a horse called "the medium of a failed betting coup" probably five times for every story about a successful one.

Nowadays, you see a horse like Sassy Image get a flood of obvious barn money from somewhere after a layoff and surgery that went unreported, and it's like taboo to even acknowledge that it happened.

The exact same happens in the stock market.They blame "Insider trading" or "Speculators", and fail to realize that it takes an ENORMOUS amount of money to do the things they claim. The crash of 1929 was partially blamed on Jesse Livermore,who did make millions on the crash by shorting the market,but he was not the cause of it.

I wouldn't compare insider betting in horse racing with the stock market.

I'm not familar with all the rules of the stock market -- but it's perfectly legal in horse racing so long as the connections are betting on their own horse.

Situations involving first-time starters and layoffs are by far the most common situations where inside money might have an edge.

Excellent post.

If we want to somehow "save" the industry, embracing what we are goes a lot further than pretending it's all puppy dogs and lollipops.

It was an excellent post - Cot Campbell is getting up there in years, perhaps he really is delusional - and how the hell does he know about the hygiene of Queen Elizabeth and J. Edgar Hoover??? Have known plenty of rich people that stink, literally and figuratively lol..

Yes I did talk about the characters, directly after asking you for an example of the pacing of the show being bad. Which you have yet to sight? I was pointing out in terms of the characters, I find more than 1 character interesting is all. We can agree to disagree.

Luck
 

I'm actually getting into the character development now, but I don't get the Dustin Hoffman character and his interplay with Farina. He seems to spend the entire time he's on screen gazing into space with a "thousand-mile" stare. I don't get his part of the story.

Will probably stay with it for a few more episodes; I hear it gets better. The pace and sound in the third episode were much improved.


Ocala Mike

You missed the point. We are now over 160 minutes into the show and nothing has really happened. Has there been anything dramatic or suspenseful? Any storyline that has developed?

It is a matter of opinion and if you Like the show, then great. I don't think it has been very good thus far but I am holding out hope for improvement.

i literally can't understand 90% of the things that come out of nick nolte's mouth....it's horrible

-bt-

I don't really have any problem with the show, other than the Hoffman storyline. The rest is fine.

Hoffman was a tremendous actor in his day--a day which included the likes of Deniro, Pacino, Nicholson and Hackman, all of whom were incredible in their prime. But none of them have done much of anything of note in 15 to 20 years. Hoffman is flat-out embarrassing in this role.

I have no problem understanding Nolte's dialogue, to the extent I think it is meant to be understood, so I don't know what you you guys are talking about. Turn on the closed captioning if you have an issue (that's what I had to do for my wife for the UK version of Life on Mars).

finally did this for episode 3. CC doesn't even understand what Escalante is saying, though it did clear up the grunts and wheezes that spill out of Nolte's character's mouth - which I now find out - apparently masquerade as dialogue.

Really trying to find one redeeming quality of this - Can't agree more that the Hoffman character is about as peculiar, unimaginative, and boring as anything I've ever seen him play. The interplay w/ Farina is cumbersome, awkward, and thoroughly uninteresting.

Apparently whoever this "Mike" character is, he is going to save this show after week 4. I hope so, because the current roster/script is abysmal.

While I don't like the Hoffman character/storyline (as of yet), I think you are being a bit harsh. There is nothing wrong with his acting. I do think that the problem is that since we are all racing fans, we are having a serious disconnect with Hoffman and his character because it really hasn't had anything to do with racing up until this point. Obviously I have enjoyed all the other storylines/scenes that revolve around the track.

It does look like it's slowly starting to come together and should continue to get better. The other thing that struck me is how good Gary Stevens has been.

Maybe I am nuts, but in my opinion we saw a pretty big happening at the end of the very first show. The P6 hit. The fallout of which for these characters is still unfolding, which to me has been very interesting. But it is a matter of opinion, and I hope it gets better for you.

Maybe Cot would like to see Tootsie play Queen Elizabeth in a future episode.

I thought it was stunning when Ace tore the buttons off his shirt in episode 1. There's a lot of rage beneath Ace's cold demeanor.

To me Hoffman's been fine. Maybe I am wrong, but my sense is that the Ace character has a bit of a temper that may still be revealed. Right now he's reflecting, he putting the pieces in place with this deal, and seems like he has a score to settle in the coming shows. I wanna see how this will play out. I think Gary Stevens has been very good, I thought he had some chops when I saw Seabiscuit, but he's been even better here in my opinion.

Yup, Ace is very upset he's a felon. He is very slowly adjusting to life on the outside. Note his subtle attraction to the female TRF rep that gave him her card

Yes, from the looks of the previews they will be developing a relationship in the coming weeks. It's great to see Joan Allen here, I think she's a great actress whom we have not seen much of as of late for whatever reason. She was great in The Contender from 2000, and this may be one some do not remember. She was in a picture in 2005 called The Upside of Anger that was terrific. Kevin Costner was also good in that film. Hopefully this will be a good role for Joan Allen on Luck, she's very talented.

Tim Goodman: In Defense Of Difficult Shows
Why HBO's 'Luck' and other series demand patience, effort.

Subcultures are not instantaneously familiar for the obvious reason. For people who haven’t been to the horse track, bet on the ponies or been around that environment, Luck will seem like a foreign world. But hell, trying to figure out the land-rights issue and why Lord and Lady Grantham were going to lose Downton Abbey wasn’t super understandable either.

If investing your time in unfamiliar subjects is too hard for you, if it’s too much of a commitment, then by all means watch network television instead. And stop whining, so the rest of the people who want to be challenged can focus.

So Luck has an indirect comparison to War and Peace.

And now the show gets the label it was screaming for from the beginning:


Pretentious

As the article says:

I happen to agree.

:tro:

I know that.

The article is borderline insulting. You can't compare this show to The Wire with a straight face. That show was intriguing from episode 1. It didn't rely on known actors and borderline self-indulgent casting like the annoying asian poker player that was in Big Trouble in Little China.

The content is lacking on the show. The characters are lacking. To compare it to one of the best series in the past 30 years is laughable.

Coach I have not seen The Wire, from all accounts I have heard it was outstanding. I have a problem with in general comparing one show to another. Each of these series should stand on their own. It's a matter of opinion, some like it, some don't but each of these shows should be judged on it's own merits.

That review is a joke - there was nothing difficult about following The Wire and I didn't need close captioning to decipher the dialogue either.

I agree with the deciphering, unless they are going to introduce that the Nolte character had a stroke there is no reason to make it so painfull on the viewer. I'm not bothered by difficulty understanding the Ortiz diologue but the Nolte character makes me want to turn off the show.

Also The Wire had 13 episodes for season 1 and the same number for season 2.

We're getting 19 shows with Luck. You can have slow pacing when the characters are fascinating. These characters suck.

Actually, no, that was explained pretty quickly. Downton Abbey is not a complicated show.

But Luck is also a better show than Downton Abbey (which I also like).

Good article; thanks for posting it. Excellent point about the difference between TV designed to keep you amused in between commercials and TV that is actually about the show.

A useful synopsis of Luck through episode 3...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luck_(TV_series)

Sorry, Hoffman is bad here--and he's been weak for years. There is no one here who is a greater admirer of his best work--Midnight Cowboy, Lenny, Marathon Man, The Graduate, Straw Dogs and several others. But that is ancient history. I think the last thing I saw him in that I'd watch again was American Buffalo, and that is no great shakes.

PS: If you want to the greatest portrayal of real world criminality I've ever seen on screen, check out one of his more obscure films, Straight Time (1978). It's not a great film, but he is great in it.

Wag the Dog was solid.

Same timeframe, mid-90s I think. After that....

Great film! He was very funny in that, in my opinion.

2008 "Lance Chance Harvey"

Pass me that blunt.

Chow

On PTI just now, during there commercial cut ins, Kornheiser just said "at the risk of sounding very very stupid, Luck might be the greatest show ever made"

I think the show is very good, but I am not ready to go there lol! It is great it was mentioned on PTI though. :)

Okay, in over 160 minutes, the biggest happening was a group of stereotype degenerates hit a pick 6. And the fallout?

- one of them gets nearly beaten to death by two run down prostitutes/grifters over some insurance scam that never turned out. (not sure but i think that is why they beat him up)

- one of them loses a couple of hands of cards and wins a nice pot against a cliche chinese restaruant owner/poker player

- one of them wants to claim a horse but loses in a shake but then goes back and buys the horse at 4x the claim.

- one is grumpy and rides on his mechanized wheel chair with his loot in a pillow case.


Call me a snob, but i don't find any of this very interesting. Certainly no knock on anyone that does. And i appreciate the sentiment- i hope it gets better as well.

Hit it right on the head. Well said.

Give Me A Break!!
 

Dennis Farina and Dustin Hoffman are the most most "watchable" characters on a so far terrible written dis-jointed mini series that has some signs of life as of episode 3.
Nick Nolte is incomprehensible,the 4 Grinders that won the pick 6 are completely unbelievable,Gary Stevens either never had or loss all ability to act(could you believe the seen where he contemplates a thought by scratching his chin for 3 1/2 minutes).
The best seen so far is where Dennis Farina and Dustin Hoffman are grilling the young "no it all" and Dennis makes him shake his hand .
The Julio character may be the closest to the real thing except the fact he never bedded a foxy veterinarian.
How about the seen where two stakes potential 2 year olds with different trainers are working from the gate in a 3 furlong match race.
There is just to much inaccurate stuff and the writers need to either write a interesting story about racing be it true or not or go ahead and make a documentary with complete accuracy and no poetic licence because they are trying to do both and failing in the most part :mad::confused: