Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Gander
The problem with this is the winner's odds werent the only odds that were "too low" and should have signaled alarms in your head.
What about General Quarters (8/1), Hold Me Back (12/1) and Chocolate Candy (9/1)? All huge underlays and justifiably low enough for you to say, someone has a lot of money bet on that horse. I dont think any of these ran particularly good.
How, as a bettor, can you use this theory to your advantage in a race like the Derby? I dont think you can.
Two horses whose odds were pretty decent, if not overlays, ran 2nd and 3rd (PON and Musket Man).
It may have worked in the 7th at Belmont that same day with Top it (6/1 screamed bet me), but I dont think this theory ever works in a race like the Derby. Too many horses and too many people who bet only once a year are involved.
|
the real dumb $ went on gen qtr's - that's all nbc and espn showed all week outside of the top contenders was the fariy tale story
Cho candy - was a wiseguy horse - steve and others top cappers used him on top - he may have hit the board if smith got him onto the rail
Hold me back - i can't give you a reason
but - steve's comment about the kid in new mexico giving a bad ride on MTB which made it harder to see any form on this horse is exactly what happens across tracks all the time - surely you don't think they always try do you?