100k to win...

[RockHardTen1985]

On Super Saver.
If I won this I think I would have actually went with the filly, but thats easy to say just sitting here at home.

[robfla]

they are actually showing them make the cash bet with the teller. Good Promotion. 800,000 if he wins

[Indian Charlie]

I'd seriously go with Line of David instead of Super Saver.

[shanej974]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

I'd seriously go with Line of David instead of Super Saver.

Another gem from the board genious. Every time you post, this should be the response.

[AeWingnut]

Originally Posted by shanej974

Another gem from the board genious. Every time you post, this should be the response.

I think he was joking

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by AeWingnut

I think he was joking

Actually, I wasn't.

They both seemed like improbable winners based on running style, so why not take a flyer on the higher priced one that just beat the shorter priced one.

Next time though, I'm going to blink myself charts for the Derby before the race is run.

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by shanej974

Another gem from the board genious. Every time you post, this should be the response.

Ugh. Another freakin tard.

Do I really need to spell out everything I say so that idiots don't misconstrue my meaning?

Here goes.

I was not saying Line of David had a better chance of winning the race than Super Saver. What I was saying, in admittedly far too few words, was that hey, Line of David just beat Super Saver while Super Saver had EVERY possible chance to pass him in the stretch, and he could not get by him.

If you are going to place a bet for $100k on one horse, why not take it on a horse that just outgamed your horse AND is also what, 2-3 times the price?

Obviously Super Saver was the more likely winner, but was he really more than three times likely to win?

The way I see it, there were three possible approaches to playing that $100k bet.

1. Play the most likely winner.
2. Play the longest shot in the race (which would have worked beautifully in the Bluegrass 10k contest).
3. Play the horse with the best possible payout that has the most likely chance of winning.

I believe most people would go with the first approach. The second approach would be reasonable for a race that is a complete clusterfugg, like the Bluegrass was.

The third approach is going to usually be the most sensible one, and I personally didn't think Super Saver was some sort of mortal lock that could not lose. Hence, why not take a flyer on Line of David?

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by shanej974

Another gem from the board genious. Every time you post, this should be the response.

By the way, I'm not sure what genious means. Did you mean genius? Or maybe genie-ous? Like I have some sort of blink my eyes, grant your wish type powers?

I'm going to blink you a brain. Let me know how you like it.

[Danzig]

betting on borel probably...


my sentimental fave is the filly. would love to see a gal win it. maybe it'd put some of the eight belles stuff to rest.

[westcoastinvader]

Originally Posted by Danzig

betting on borel probably...

In the interview immediately after the race the $900,000 guy mentioned he noted Calvin Borel already had winners on the day when he placed the $100,000 on Super Saver.

[Merlinsky]

What kind of impact did that have on Super Saver's odds given a lot of money is bet on him and on Calvin already? I wondered how much the 8-1 drop to 7-1 was that, and how much was just a bunch of last minute runs to the windows. Surely it's a boatload of money as is. Can the needle really move that much with 100K at this point?

[robfla]

OMG

[Left Bank]

That dude just won a shitload of cash.

[CSC]

Originally Posted by Merlinsky

What kind of impact did that have on Super Saver's odds given a lot of money is bet on him and on Calvin already? I wondered how much the 8-1 drop to 7-1 was that, and how much was just a bunch of last minute runs to the windows. Surely it's a boatload of money as is. Can the needle really move that much with 100K at this point?

There's no doubt Super Saver was an underlay yesterday, 100K into the win pool, plus the Borel effect, and the publicity the bet generated on this pick no doubt lowered SS's odds. Overall I don't know if I approve of these gimmick plays; however you have to say good on that guy for picking the winner, that's 2 for 2 with last year's Goldikova win bet.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by Merlinsky

What kind of impact did that have on Super Saver's odds given a lot of money is bet on him and on Calvin already? I wondered how much the 8-1 drop to 7-1 was that, and how much was just a bunch of last minute runs to the windows. Surely it's a boatload of money as is. Can the needle really move that much with 100K at this point?

$0.60 according to Steve Crist: http://cristblog.drf.com/crist/2010/05/sixty-cents.html

The $100,000 increased Super Saver's share of the win pool from 8.97 % to 9.27 %, dropping his odds from 8.36-1 to 8.06-1 (after breakage, from 8.30-1 to 8.00-1.) So it appears that Super Saver would have paid $18.60 rather than $18.00 to win had the bet not been part of the pool. Conversely, had Ice Box finished first rather than 2nd, he would have paid $25.40, but without the bet he would have paid $25.20.

[mclem0822]

Originally Posted by RockHardTen1985

On Super Saver.
If I won this I think I would have actually went with the filly, but thats easy to say just sitting here at home.

Would love to be in his shoes! And POCKETS!