8/2: Saratoga (Day 10-Amsterdam)

[randallscott35]

Fan, why use DM on your ticket at all if you think he can be had?

[fantini33]

My thought on including him was that I needn't be correct on my opinions in all legs.

6) Wide Open (wrong)
7) Wide Open (wrong again)
8) Discretely Mine could be had (seriously wrong)
9) Ramon could get that horse to wire (wrong.....interesting ride though.....on the pace, off the pace, shuffled back, came a little at the end. A pretty uncertain ride by arguably the nations best jock)

My point is, had I been correct once or twice, I didn't want that horse to be the beat that kept me from collecting on my other opinions, or lack thereof.

I'm wise enough to know that stringing together four solid thoughts consecutive is a difficult task, but sometimes you can "get it right" even when you are wrong.

I thought it looked wide open. Not so much. The return on that sequence ended up being more than respectable. ($273)

To hit big sequences you need to be able to include some odd horses, and hope you can land more than one in a four race block. I thought this was an opportunity, but felt the include of Disc. Mine would be prudent if the other legs did indeed blow up, which they didn't.

[RockHardTen1985]

Originally Posted by fantini33

My thought on including him was that I needn't be correct on my opinions in all legs.

6) Wide Open (wrong)
7) Wide Open (wrong again)
8) Discretely Mine could be had (seriously wrong)
9) Ramon could get that horse to wire (wrong.....interesting ride though.....on the pace, off the pace, shuffled back, came a little at the end. A pretty uncertain ride by arguably the nations best jock)

My point is, had I been correct once or twice, I didn't want that horse to be the beat that kept me from collecting on my other opinions, or lack thereof.

I'm wise enough to know that stringing together four solid thoughts consecutive is a difficult task, but sometimes you can "get it right" even when you are wrong.

I thought it looked wide open. Not so much. The return on that sequence ended up being more than respectable. ($273)

To hit big sequences you need to be able to include some odd horses, and hope you can land more than one in a four race block. I thought this was an opportunity, but felt the include of Disc. Mine would be prudent if the other legs did indeed blow up, which they didn't.

I totally blew out.

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by fantini33

My thought on including him was that I needn't be correct on my opinions in all legs.

6) Wide Open (wrong)
7) Wide Open (wrong again)
8) Discretely Mine could be had (seriously wrong)
9) Ramon could get that horse to wire (wrong.....interesting ride though.....on the pace, off the pace, shuffled back, came a little at the end. A pretty uncertain ride by arguably the nations best jock)

My point is, had I been correct once or twice, I didn't want that horse to be the beat that kept me from collecting on my other opinions, or lack thereof.

I'm wise enough to know that stringing together four solid thoughts consecutive is a difficult task, but sometimes you can "get it right" even when you are wrong.

I thought it looked wide open. Not so much. The return on that sequence ended up being more than respectable. ($273)

To hit big sequences you need to be able to include some odd horses, and hope you can land more than one in a four race block. I thought this was an opportunity, but felt the include of Disc. Mine would be prudent if the other legs did indeed blow up, which they didn't.

I hear you dude. I had this discussion with some players maybe 5 years ago and they changed my mind on things. Basically I did as you did and included the fave in multis and their point was, if you think they are vulnerable, and the price will return less, why include them at all....I came to the conclusion they were right actually. Now DM won today, but if you feel a big fave is going down, just play with confidence. Good talk.

[fantini33]

I felt he was less than 50/50, not enough to toss, not strong enough to single and play the sequence for more $$$$, but thought including others that had a chance could yield the score...

Worthy of debate, I am sure.