Derby Trail Forums

Go Back   Derby Trail Forums > Main Forum > The Paddock
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10-19-2006, 04:47 PM
oracle80
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eurobounce
I think you have lost this bet.
Well I know I got one!!!
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10-19-2006, 05:11 PM
sumitas sumitas is offline
Santa Anita
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,362
Default

a pointless thread.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 10-19-2006, 05:12 PM
oracle80
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sumitas
a pointless thread.
How many races have you actually witnessed from keeneland?
And whats been your take on the rail, and running style of the winners?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 10-19-2006, 05:17 PM
Coach Pants
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Not to be a redboarder but I had $20 across on that horse. Couldn't understand how the hell the odds were so high considering how sharp Motion is off the claim and 180+ day layoff.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 10-19-2006, 05:23 PM
brianwspencer's Avatar
brianwspencer brianwspencer is offline
Atlantic City Race Course
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 4,894
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by oracle80
How many races have you actually witnessed from keeneland?
And whats been your take on the rail, and running style of the winners?
oracle, this is a totally legit and serious question here just out of my curiosity because you seem to really hate this stuff.

what's the difference between the old keeneland and the new? why is everyone up in arms. at the old keeneland you would just bet the horse who would get the lead and you'd win more than you'd lose.

at the new keeneland, you throw out the horse who is going to get the lead, and you will narrow your choices down much faster -- it makes handicapping really easy lately.

aren't they really the same thing? a track bias is a track bias, so why is this one so much more patently offensive to everyone?
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 10-19-2006, 05:29 PM
oracle80
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by brianwspencer
oracle, this is a totally legit and serious question here just out of my curiosity because you seem to really hate this stuff.

what's the difference between the old keeneland and the new? why is everyone up in arms. at the old keeneland you would just bet the horse who would get the lead and you'd win more than you'd lose.

at the new keeneland, you throw out the horse who is going to get the lead, and you will narrow your choices down much faster -- it makes handicapping really easy lately.

aren't they really the same thing? a track bias is a track bias, so why is this one so much more patently offensive to everyone?
I agree, the old stuff had a pronounced speed bias.
But its about more than that. Horses with no talent whatsoever are beating horses miles better than they are on a daily and consistent basis.
Its not poly I am opposed to per say.
Its the fact that its being marketed as a dirt replacement.
If tracks had room for a poly course, dirt, and turf, that would be fine.
But eliminating the dirt entirely is wrong. let the cripples run on poly all they want.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 10-19-2006, 05:36 PM
brianwspencer's Avatar
brianwspencer brianwspencer is offline
Atlantic City Race Course
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 4,894
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by oracle80
I agree, the old stuff had a pronounced speed bias.
But its about more than that. Horses with no talent whatsoever are beating horses miles better than they are on a daily and consistent basis.
Its not poly I am opposed to per say.
Its the fact that its being marketed as a dirt replacement.
If tracks had room for a poly course, dirt, and turf, that would be fine.
But eliminating the dirt entirely is wrong. let the cripples run on poly all they want.
fair enough, i was just wondering as i'm jumping into all of these conversations a bit late coming over finally from the espn boards after not enjoying myself there anymore.

i've found, in the days that i've handicapped and watched the races (about 2/3 of them) that most of the longshot horses who are winning aren't horses with "no talent" but more horses that are taking to the surface a bit better than others. most, and i use that term "most" very carefully, have run races in the past that would show them as capable of winning the races they are entered in -- just some examples off the top of my head: Connections from this past Sunday. He's not consistent, but he's capable of running the sort of race it would take to win it. His style suited the profile of the course perfectly -- and he paid about $61. Add to that the Malibu Mint/Hide and Chic exacta from Saturday -- based on how the track was playing, the first horse I threw out was Behaving Badly, and she got bet down hard.

Dirt substitute? No, I don't think it should be one either. But at the same time, I think that alot of people should stop pretending that it's impossible to handicap or bull**** to handicap and that they are somehow above it. It's been easy easy easy easy, RIDICULOUSLY easy money lately. I haven't done so well at the racetrack in months.

That's my two cents.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:55 AM.


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