Bombaguia

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by RockHardTen1985

The trip sucked, but this horse is not that good.
Garcia had him wide and moved really early 2 back, so its not the jockey. The trainer sucks, and the horse is just not that good. Thats how I see it.

The guy takes time out to try and alert people to a possible trip he saw and you respond with this?

Must you ruin every room on the board?

[RockHardTen1985]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

The guy takes time out to try and alert people to a possible trip he saw and you respond with this?

Must you ruin every room on the board?

Its part of the discussion. The horse is not that good, bad horses have bad trips. So you bet bad horses back? The horse had a bad trip, but he also had one with Garcia up in NY. Then came back and faced about the worse group of maidens ever and could not manage at least a 2nd. Not sure why the attack, my point is pretty clear. When it comes to this horse dont let the trip trick ya, I doubt he finds the winners circle anytime soon, unless its a drop down type situation.

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by RockHardTen1985

Its part of the discussion. The horse is not that good, bad horses have bad trips. So you bet bad horses back? The horse had a bad trip, but he also had one with Garcia up in NY. Then came back and faced about the worse group of maidens ever and could not manage at least a 2nd. Not sure why the attack, my point is pretty clear. When it comes to this horse dont let the trip trick ya, I doubt he finds the winners circle anytime soon, unless its a drop down type situation.

Has it ever dawned on you no one cares about your opinion?

[RockHardTen1985]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

Has it ever dawned on you no one cares about your opinion?

This is really getting old. Im the one who ruined this thread? I gave points and reassons to why he is just not that good. You now in 2 posts have not done anything other then attack me. Leave it alone.
I hope, in this case Golfer looks at my opinion it will likely save him some cash.
If Im wrong about the horse fine, but as far as messing this thread up, no not me, not this time. Your the only one talking about anything other then the horse and the races.

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by RockHardTen1985

This is really getting old. Im the one who ruined this thread? I gave points and reassons to why he is just not that good. You now in 2 posts have not done anything other then attack me. Leave it alone.
I hope, in this case Golfer looks at my opinion it will likely save him some cash.
If Im wrong about the horse fine, but as far as messing this thread up, no not me, not this time. Your the only one talking about anything other then the horse and the races.

I knew I was right about the bi polar thing.

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by RockHardTen1985

The horse is not that good, bad horses have bad trips. So you bet bad horses back?

Not that it matters, because you don't listen and are so stuck in your losing ways it won't matter. But this part I have highlighted is so stupid I almost don't believe it.

When looking at a trip, the quality of the animal doesn't matter. Bad horses don't have bad trips. It wouldn't matter if the horse in question is a 5k claimer. If it has a trip that is worth noting, than you make a note of it and follow the horse next time. The idea is to bet horses back who have had a trip or trips that compromise their finish in the trip race and to try and find horses that ran better than it looks on paper due to their trip.

You are so stuck on just giving your opinion that what you are talking about doesn't matter. It's not about who is good or who isn't. It's about finding winners. Some of the best scores I have had have come in claiming races with horses that have had trips.

[Bigsmc]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

Not that it matters, because you don't listen and are so stuck in your losing ways it won't matter. But this part I have highlighted is so stupid I almost don't believe it.

When looking at a trip, the quality of the animal doesn't matter. Bad horses don't have bad trips. It wouldn't matter if the horse in question is a 5k claimer. If it has a trip that is worth noting, than you make a note of it and follow the horse next time. The idea is to bet horses back who have had a trip or trips that compromise their finish in the trip race and to try and find horses that ran better than it looks on paper due to their trip.

You are so stuck on just giving your opinion that what you are talking about doesn't matter. It's not about who is good or who isn't. It's about finding winners. Some of the best scores I have had have come in claiming races with horses that have had trips.

Very fine work.

[NTamm1215]

Trips are subjective but it's important to keep an open mind. Take Alykela from the 8th at Aqueduct on Sunday for example. Two back she was given a horrible ride by a double bug who has butchered at least a dozen horses just since racing switched to the inner track. Last time out she finally switched to a journeyman but was compromised by a very slow pace. Sunday, she was getting a rider change to Junior Alvarado and landed in a race that had a bit more speed. She was tabbed by Andy on HRTV and on the NYRA show and she surged late to get up at 12-1.

All types of horses have bad trips and it's important not to keep the narrow opinion that "bad horses have bad trips." The results of races are almost always indicative of how they're run.

[RockHardTen1985]

Originally Posted by NTamm1215

Trips are subjective but it's important to keep an open mind. Take Alykela from the 8th at Aqueduct on Sunday for example. Two back she was given a horrible ride by a double bug who has butchered at least a dozen horses just since racing switched to the inner track. Last time out she finally switched to a journeyman but was compromised by a very slow pace. Sunday, she was getting a rider change to Junior Alvarado and landed in a race that had a bit more speed. She was tabbed by Andy on HRTV and on the NYRA show and she surged late to get up at 12-1.

All types of horses have bad trips and it's important not to keep the narrow opinion that "bad horses have bad trips." The results of races are almost always indicative of how they're run.

Help me understand then. What about a horse like Battle Of Hastings? Horrible underlay because of a bad trip, what did he do? I just dont think its that simple. If a bad horse has a bad trip it does not mean you simply bet him back off that trip. You need to understand the race, the conditions and everything else that goes with it. Or this horse for example has already had bad wide trips, and just continues to have them.

[NTamm1215]

Originally Posted by RockHardTen1985

Help me understand then. What about a horse like Battle Of Hastings? Horrible underlay because of a bad trip, what did he do? I just dont think its that simple. If a bad horse has a bad trip it does not mean you simply bet him back off that trip. You need to understand the race, the conditions and everything else that goes with it. Or this horse for example has already had bad wide trips, and just continues to have them.

The way I approached Battle of Hastings was as follows. He is a horse that has a very difficult time winning in the past. His trouble in the Ft. Lauderdale was VERY well documented and he became the type of "trip" horse that often becomes a "trap." In the context of the Ft. Lauderdale the other horse who was affected, perhaps not in such a dramatic way, was Smart Bid. I opted for the latter in the hopes that his price would be 5-6x what BOH's price would be. It ended up being 8x the price, and I lost by a nose.

You shouldn't take a horse like BOH at what you think will be a small price, and that is because trips are subjective.

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by RockHardTen1985

Help me understand then. What about a horse like Battle Of Hastings? Horrible underlay because of a bad trip, what did he do? I just dont think its that simple. If a bad horse has a bad trip it does not mean you simply bet him back off that trip. You need to understand the race, the conditions and everything else that goes with it. Or this horse for example has already had bad wide trips, and just continues to have them.

Seriously, what are you talking about?

It's not about bad horses or good horses. If you really want to try and understand, the quality of the animal does not matter.

You're right, it isn't simple, but it's also not that confusing if you would just shut up and listen to what people are saying. The horse was making his first start on grass. He had shown speed previously and on Sunday found himself far back early. He made a pretty solid run around the turn and passed 7 horses in the matter of a few seconds. That is not typically the kind of move you see winning, however it was a very encouraging run.

Now, if he shows up in a stake next time, or if he's 6/5 in a maiden race, yeah, he's not the kind of horse you bet back. But if he's a fair price, he's the kind of horse you want to bet back, because of his run.

That is the point of this room. To discuss trip horses. No one is suggesting betting each of these horses with both fists. It's an exchange of ideas about horses. It's not a good vs bad list.

What is so confusing about this?