Derby Trail/Triple Crown Notebook

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis

Shared Belief OFF the Derby Trail officially per Blood Horse:

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-raci...ky-derby-trail

that's too bad. hope the foot gets better. it can turn into such a bad thing so quickly.

[lemoncrush]

Originally Posted by Danzig

that's too bad. hope the foot gets better. it can turn into such a bad thing so quickly.

Hollendorfer, from the bloodhorse article:

"I never had the horse on the Derby trail anyway; the media had him on the Derby trail," Hollendorfer said. "When me and my owners discussed this, way back when we got the horse, we never were concerned about getting to the Derby anyway."

So how dumb to the people feel who bet on this horse that last few Kentucky Derby future pools? I thought Churchill consulted with trainers while compiling their list to make sure that they at least were considering going down the derby trail.
It's fine if they have over 250 horses on the list like they do at Wynn, but when they narrow it down to 23, you should at least feel that the horse's connections hope to make the derby, even if it is obviously foolish to play a horse that has been on the sidelines for so long.

[tanner12oz]

I wouldn't put hollendorfer in charge of hr or customer service if you know what I mean

[FATPIANO]

Originally Posted by tanner12oz

I wouldn't put hollendorfer in charge of hr or customer service if you know what I mean

LOL

[Aly-Sheba]

Originally Posted by lemoncrush

Hollendorfer, from the bloodhorse article:

"I never had the horse on the Derby trail anyway; the media had him on the Derby trail," Hollendorfer said. "When me and my owners discussed this, way back when we got the horse, we never were concerned about getting to the Derby anyway."

So how dumb to the people feel who bet on this horse that last few Kentucky Derby future pools? I thought Churchill consulted with trainers while compiling their list to make sure that they at least were considering going down the derby trail.
It's fine if they have over 250 horses on the list like they do at Wynn, but when they narrow it down to 23, you should at least feel that the horse's connections hope to make the derby, even if it is obviously foolish to play a horse that has been on the sidelines for so long.

While I agree that he should not have been put on the last pool, you have to know any time a horse has a miss-step trying to get to the Derby, that is a sign not to bet in the future bet. Its hard enough getting there when things go smooth.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by lemoncrush

Hollendorfer, from the bloodhorse article:

"I never had the horse on the Derby trail anyway; the media had him on the Derby trail," Hollendorfer said. "When me and my owners discussed this, way back when we got the horse, we never were concerned about getting to the Derby anyway."

So how dumb to the people feel who bet on this horse that last few Kentucky Derby future pools? I thought Churchill consulted with trainers while compiling their list to make sure that they at least were considering going down the derby trail.
It's fine if they have over 250 horses on the list like they do at Wynn, but when they narrow it down to 23, you should at least feel that the horse's connections hope to make the derby, even if it is obviously foolish to play a horse that has been on the sidelines for so long.

that's why they call it gambling, rather than winning.

[Rudeboyelvis]

Originally Posted by Danzig

that's why they call it gambling, rather than winning.

Most houses wouldn't take a bet on a team they know isn't even playing. I agree with Lemon Crush - there are tons of horses they could have put in his stead if this was well known, rather than sucker bettors.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis

Most houses wouldn't take a bet on a team they know isn't even playing. I agree with Lemon Crush - there are tons of horses they could have put in his stead if this was well known, rather than sucker bettors.

but it wasn't well known til now. he might say the horse was never on the derby trail, but i think he was-until he wasn't.
all the horses are a crap shoot. we've seen how many now get scratched the day before the race, or the morning of?

as for teams, you can bet before the season starts on who you think wins the series. no one knows ahead of time who will be in the post season.
anyone following racing knew he had a foot issue. if they chose to bet him anyway, that's on them.

[lemoncrush]

Originally Posted by Danzig

but it wasn't well known til now. he might say the horse was never on the derby trail, but i think he was-until he wasn't.
all the horses are a crap shoot. we've seen how many now get scratched the day before the race, or the morning of?

as for teams, you can bet before the season starts on who you think wins the series. no one knows ahead of time who will be in the post season.
anyone following racing knew he had a foot issue. if they chose to bet him anyway, that's on them.

I get all that. But including Shared Belief as an individual entry amongst their 23 betting interests in the last pool may have led some to believe that Churchill received good information that the connections had the best intentions to go the Derby. I didn't bet him, so I don't really care. Just think it was a little disingenuous including him as an individual entry. He should have been included in the "all others".

[Aly-Sheba]

Originally Posted by lemoncrush

I get all that. But including Shared Belief as an individual entry amongst their 23 betting interests in the last pool may have led some to believe that Churchill received good information that the connections had the best intentions to go the Derby. I didn't bet him, so I don't really care. Just think it was a little disingenuous including him as an individual entry. He should have been included in the "all others".

CDI doesn't care, they only care about handle, so they can get their cut. Look at all the tracks that don't do anything about the perception of past posting. Whether it happens or not, the perception is there and they don't care as long as they get their percentage of the handle. The more the better, even if it's after the bell.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by lemoncrush

I get all that. But including Shared Belief as an individual entry amongst their 23 betting interests in the last pool may have led some to believe that Churchill received good information that the connections had the best intentions to go the Derby. I didn't bet him, so I don't really care. Just think it was a little disingenuous including him as an individual entry. He should have been included in the "all others".

and i have no doubt barring the hoof issue, he would have been a derby entrant. there's too much attention being paid to the trainers' comments now that the horse is no longer a potential starter.
of course key horses, especially the champ 2 yo, will be a separate betting interest as long as they're a potential starter.
sorry that i don't share the outrage. i just don't see a reason believe there's nefarious behavior here. all 23 individual entrants could end up out of the race. then what? will future bettors be saying there shouldn't be a future bet at all?