![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
Making a horse 30-1 instead of 50-1 starts to really increase odds on some of the lower horses, which is tough to do this year. |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
![]() I don't think there is a chance in hell that either Bodemeister or Union Rags will be under 5-1. I'd say even 6-1 would be low. Lookin' At Lucky was over 6-1 as the favorite. And only two others were under 10-1 that year (Super Saver and Sidney's Candy).
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Hard to envision we'll have a Big Brown (2-1) or even a Friesan Fire (3.8-1?!?!?!?!? - sorry, had to throw that in there for laughs) in the 2012 Derby.
__________________
The world's foremost expert on virtually everything on the Redskins 2010 season: "Im going to go out on a limb here. I say they make the playoffs." |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
![]() 6-1 because he drew the rail. He would have been 4-1 or less in the 5-20 posts.
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Unless you are only betting in the win pool, the odds are meaningless for assessing legitimate value. I think you get some much more realistic value on the "longshots" in the exotics pool compared to the win pool, where a load of the novice money ends up going.
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Good point, but there were still only three horses under 10-1.
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]() I'm starting to really like Hanson.
__________________
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
![]() At 10-1 or higher, me too.
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]() I prefer Nelson, but Hanson will do.
|
#10
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Which one?
I always liked #17.
__________________
please use generalizations and non-truths when arguing your side, thank you |
#11
|
||||
|
||||
![]() I think he would have won if he drew 5-10
__________________
Do I think Charity can win? Well, I am walking around in yesterday's suit. |
#12
|
||||
|
||||
![]() The odds look right in the ball park.
__________________
Tom Cooley photo |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|