Why was the "Andy versus Scuds" thread closed?

King Glorious · #1 03-26-2009, 09:11 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 · #2 03-26-2009, 09:22 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 · #3 03-26-2009, 09:42 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 · #4 03-26-2009, 09:33 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 · #5 03-26-2009, 09:41 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 · #6 03-26-2009, 09:54 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 · #7 03-26-2009, 10:01 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 · #8 03-26-2009, 04:17 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 · #9 03-26-2009, 05:34 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 · #10 03-26-2009, 06:05 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.

NTamm1215 · #11 03-26-2009, 07:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by philcski

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.

Considering the quality of that field and that he couldn't really go 9 furlongs let alone 10, I thought he ran a terrific race in the Manhattan.

I also foolishly bet him in the BC Mile and got really excited at the top of the stretch.

NT

Bobby Fischer · #12 03-26-2009, 09:06 PM

you guys remember better than I do , i had to look him up again. I remember Einstein being in that race but forgot it was Mending Fences on the spill. That race (Dixie on preakness day) was wild. Can't remember If that breakdown really hurt cosmonaut as much as it was dramatic looking, not sure if it helped him by wiping others out without seeing the head on again. Not sure if the following race really fit my point with all that going on.

the citation, the hollywood turf cup , the Manhattan (following the spill), the bernard baruch, even the river city all underlays altthough the river city was totally different as he was underlayed against a weak field he still should have been moderately favored in.

The point had nothing really to do with Cosmonaut or Giant Oak or Pay in Kind as individuals. I used Cosmonaut and Giant Oak as symbols to represent the type of horse who gets bad trips because he is in over his head and is apt to find trouble and will either find trouble once again or really isn't all that good with a good trip. More importantly these types get into obvious trouble that puts them on everyone's watch list "he had to go wide" etc... the public bets them enough that there is no value.

Pay in Kind is a symbol of the kind of horse that actually could capitalize on a better trip and isn't necessarily as prone to a bad one. (the real world PIK won back, but he was unbettable at even money).
I haven't been playing Aqueduct, but I was watching the youtube Trips & Traps and he was a featured trip horse. That's actually a good show. Everybody thinks they are the best handicapper, but it is nice to hear someone's opinion about a trip. It's hard to have that conversation with a lot of people. Most people I talk to about horses offline DON'T WANT to hear about the higher level aspects of the game. They aren't in it to make a little extra money, and they aren't in it for the mental challenge. They're in it for a gambling addiction and an adrenalin rush.

philcski · #13 03-26-2009, 10:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NTamm1215

Considering the quality of that field and that he couldn't really go 9 furlongs let alone 10, I thought he ran a terrific race in the Manhattan.

I also foolishly bet him in the BC Mile and got really excited at the top of the stretch.

NT

He did run well in the Manhattan, I had taken a stand against him and midstretch was pretty much resigned to losing. Thankfully my old buddy Better Talk Now had one more G1 left in him. That pick 4 ended up paying pretty well.

That BC Mile, with the turf as soft as it was, there really wasn't a "foolish" bet. Turns out the best horse won, after all.