Derby Trail/Triple Crown Notebook

[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.

[Kasept]

BAFFERT: Jay Privman reports that Chitu (M. Smith) confirmed for Sunland Derby as well as Midnight Hawk (M. Garcia) who must have bounced out of the San Felipe fresh like daisy..

[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?

[lemoncrush]

Originally Posted by Danzig

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?

I think this example gives more proof that they should open it up to a lot more individual betting interests than 23. If you bet a future in the NFL or any other major sport, they have odds for every single team. Should be the same for horse racing instead of 23 horses hand picked by a few people.

If every triple crown nominated horse was available to wager on, I'd have zero problem with the secrecy around Shared Belief's connections to not point to the derby.

[Kasept]

STANDINGS UPDATED: http://www.kentuckyderby.com/sites/k...0Standings.pdf

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by lemoncrush

I think this example gives more proof that they should open it up to a lot more individual betting interests than 23. If you bet a future in the NFL or any other major sport, they have odds for every single team. Should be the same for horse racing instead of 23 horses hand picked by a few people.

If every triple crown nominated horse was available to wager on, I'd have zero problem with the secrecy around Shared Belief's connections to not point to the derby.

agree completely that they should have more than 23.
as to secrecy regarding shared belief....it was no secret he had a hoof issue. that's a caveat emptor moment right there.