Why was the "Andy versus Scuds" thread closed?

King Glorious · #1 03-26-2009, 09:49 AM

I've never understood why horses are downgraded for being good enough and tractable enough to get good trips every race. I'd think that's a plus and not the negative that so many people seem to think it is. People always want to look for the horses that have bad trips and then salivate at the chance to bet them the next time, with the thinking that a good trip will earn them a win. Giant Oak in this year's Louisiana Derby is a prime example of that. What seems to happen more often though is the horses that lack the early speed and quickness to get themselves in good positions just end up with yet another bad trip while the horses with good tactical speed are able to be put in good position time after time and allowed to show their best stuff.......and handicappers downgrade their efforts because it was accomplished with an easy trip. If it happens one time, I can see you wanting to see it again. When it happens two and three and four times, it's not luck.

CSC · #2 03-26-2009, 10:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Glorious

I've never understood why horses are downgraded for being good enough and tractable enough to get good trips every race. I'd think that's a plus and not the negative that so many people seem to think it is. People always want to look for the horses that have bad trips and then salivate at the chance to bet them the next time, with the thinking that a good trip will earn them a win. Giant Oak in this year's Louisiana Derby is a prime example of that. What seems to happen more often though is the horses that lack the early speed and quickness to get themselves in good positions just end up with yet another bad trip while the horses with good tactical speed are able to be put in good position time after time and allowed to show their best stuff.......and handicappers downgrade their efforts because it was accomplished with an easy trip. If it happens one time, I can see you wanting to see it again. When it happens two and three and four times, it's not luck.

In general terms I agree with you, if a horse has multiple gears to stay out of trouble, it is a strength. Good horses get good trips....Conversely if a horse is continuing to find trouble in races, there has to be a reason for it. Dollar Bill comes to mind, there are still people out there that still think this horse had a massive amount of talent? He just fooled them with his supposed bad luck.

blackthroatedwind · #3 03-26-2009, 10:04 AM

It's all about price, KG, and horse's who get perfect trips AND are short prices are poor bets.

Believe it or not, some of us bet on these races, and that's the perspective we use when looking at races. Chasing perfect trip winners, at low odds, is a way to lose. Assuming horses that have gotten perfect trips in the past will get them in the future is another easy route to Brokesville.

King Glorious · #4 03-26-2009, 10:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

It's all about price, KG, and horse's who get perfect trips AND are short prices are poor bets.

Believe it or not, some of us bet on these races, and that's the perspective we use when looking at races. Chasing perfect trip winners, at low odds, is a way to lose. Assuming horses that have gotten perfect trips in the past will get them in the future is another easy route to Brokesville.

Wow. People actually bet on races? I may have to try that one day. Thanks for the tip.

Now then, if you want to talk about betting prices in relation to actual chances of winning, that's a different story. Obviously, the same horse that you may like the most for the win will often be a different horse than the one you will bet. I know I'm in my first month of following this sport and all and don't bet a dime but I think I kinda learned that. I wasn't, however, referring to the betting aspect of it. Also, on the flip side of your last sentence, assuming horses that have gotten bad trips in the past will get better ones in the future is a more direct route to Brokesville.

NTamm1215 · #5 03-26-2009, 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Glorious

Also, on the flip side of your last sentence, assuming horses that have gotten bad trips in the past will get better ones in the future is a more direct route to Brokesville.

I couldn't disagree more.

NT

ironprospect · #6 03-26-2009, 10:42 AM

Pioneer has been well spotted, i believe that ends very shortly.

the Mousse will "cream" him and I would like to believe the Mousse is real but ???

Bobby Fischer · #7 03-26-2009, 10:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Glorious

Also, on the flip side of your last sentence, assuming horses that have gotten bad trips in the past will get better ones in the future is a more direct route to Brokesville.

That's where your skill and honesty comes in.

Can you tell the difference between a Giant Oak, Cosmonaut type of horse (an overrated type that finds trouble and will be overbet for a few races)

or a true troubled trip like Pay In Kind ?

Can you be honest with yourself when you aren't sure?

NTamm1215 · #8 03-26-2009, 10:41 AM

The nuances of trip handicapping can be easily missed. For example, and Andy may disagree, I think there is a horse in the feature today at Aqu who absolutely stands out based on his trip last time. It didn't have anything to do with him getting stopped or into trouble, but it had to do with race flow/dynamics.

That is where it is often quite safe to assume that a horse coming off a less than stellar trip will get a better one in his/her next start.

NT

King Glorious · #9 03-26-2009, 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NTamm1215

The nuances of trip handicapping can be easily missed. For example, and Andy may disagree, I think there is a horse in the feature today at Aqu who absolutely stands out based on his trip last time. It didn't have anything to do with him getting stopped or into trouble, but it had to do with race flow/dynamics.

That is where it is often quite safe to assume that a horse coming off a less than stellar trip will get a better one in his/her next start.

NT

And as I said to Andy's post, if you are talking about chances relative to odds, I can understand where you are coming from and give it more credence. But what I don't understand is why it's safe to assume that a horse that had a bad trip will get a better one next time but bad to assume that one that had a good trip will get another one next time.

NTamm1215 · #10 03-26-2009, 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Glorious

And as I said to Andy's post, if you are talking about chances relative to odds, I can understand where you are coming from and give it more credence. But what I don't understand is why it's safe to assume that a horse that had a bad trip will get a better one next time but bad to assume that one that had a good trip will get another one next time.

I would say that it has something to do with the number of horses who receive bad trips per race vs. the amount who don't. There are generally very few legitimately "bad trip" horses in a given race or on a given card.

NT

Scurlogue Champ · #11 03-26-2009, 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobby Fischer

That's where your skill and honesty comes in.

Can you tell the difference between a Giant Oak, Cosmonaut type of horse (an overrated type that finds trouble and will be overbet for a few races)

or a true troubled trip like Pay In Kind ?

Can you be honest with yourself when you aren't sure?

What type of trouble has Cosmonaut had other than not being fast enough?

I haven't glanced at his PP's lately, maybe I forgot some trouble lines.

Scurlogue Champ · #12 03-26-2009, 06:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

Off the top of my head I believe he was the horse that had to jump over a fallen rival in the Dixie or whatever they call the turf race on Preakness Day now. Aside from that I seem to remember him the same way you are.

Einstein dropped the rider I believe after Mending Fences broke down. Remarkable News walked away with it.

How do I remember this one? I bet $100 on Remarkable News.

2007-05-19 13:11:51 Bet* Pimlico 10 Win $100.00 12 $100.00 $690.00

philcski · #13 03-26-2009, 07:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scurlogue Champ

Einstein dropped the rider I believe after Mending Fences broke down. Remarkable News walked away with it.

How do I remember this one? I bet $100 on Remarkable News.

2007-05-19 13:11:51 Bet* Pimlico 10 Win $100.00 12 $100.00 $690.00

Hossy is right though, Cosmonaut hurdled Mending Fences and still finished 2nd. Off that effort he was sent off at 7/2 against Better Talk Now, English Channel, and Shakis in the Manhattan... and finished 4th after leading midstretch.

10 pnt move up · #14 03-26-2009, 04:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

It's all about price, KG, and horse's who get perfect trips AND are short prices are poor bets.

Believe it or not, some of us bet on these races, and that's the perspective we use when looking at races. Chasing perfect trip winners, at low odds, is a way to lose. Assuming horses that have gotten perfect trips in the past will get them in the future is another easy route to Brokesville.

One of the best way to brokesville is betting on a game that has a 25% rake on most of the wagers

but yea your premise evades most people who wager.