Quote:
|
Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS
They really need to find someone halfway competent to come up with the 23 horses they choose in these future pools.
I know I already complained about this with Alina not being in Round 2 of this bet - but isn't the point to pick the 23 horses that the public are likely to bet the most money on?
By my count, there are 7 horses who closed at odds of 78/1 or more - and three horses who closed at odds of 99/1 or more.
There is simply no way that Alina wouldn't take a good deal of money in this bet. She was coming into the weekend off of a triple digit Beyer in her most recent start - and she is trained by Steve Asmussen - who is dwarfing all other trainers in total stakes wins and money won so far this year.
Basically, whoever's deciding on which horses to take obviously has a negative opinion on Alina (and that is fine) - however, their personal opinions of these horses should have no impact on which 23 they choose. They have a duty to select the 23 indivdual horses whom the public will most likely wager the most money on.
You've got to be kidding me if they thought that a horse like Valentine Fever (who was 12th beaten 20 in her only start on dirt) would take as much or more money than an Asmussen filly coming off of a triple digit Beyer.
Even a horse like French Kiss (who was 4 times a bigger price than Alina today) was not going to take as much or more money.
When you see things like this - you just wonder what is going on sometimes.
|
I agree, and think the Oaks future bet is a far bigger risk than the derby.
Being that they usually have 10-14 horses, instead of the 20 in the derby.
It also seems that running in the Oaks isn't the primary goal for every decent 3-yo filly, like it is for the colts.