A Derby fave?
 

let me start by saying I did not pick the derby exacta or tri however found it very interesting Big Brown as 2-1 fave was seeming ly not liked by many of the so called experts. I refer to saturdays racing form derby pages 32-33. there were listed the picks of 20 of the top handicappers the form has to offer and exactly 3 of the 20 handicappers chose BB to win. 4 0f them did not even pick BB in their top 4 selections, and none of them had the exacta even with choosing 4 horses except for mary rampellini who threw in the filly with as her 4th choice. this game must be even harder than I thought

I guess no one wanted to take a 5-2 shot breaking from the 20 post in his 4th career start. Who would have thought that he would be able to race 4 wide the whole way and win for fun. I am not suprised, but I tossed him on Saturday and I would do it again.

That does seem strange after the horse did what many deemed nearly impossible when he won the Florida Derby. Now, he's won the Kentucky Derby from what many said was an impossible post and there's a whole chorus of folks who are saying he can't win the triple crown. Ain't horseracing and the triple crown in particular grand? I love it when they start this stuff like, "no gelding has won since 1915" and "no horse has won from the 20 post since."..(whenever. Actually, I think it was Clyde Van Dusen in both cases) and what were some of the other mantras? No BC juvy winner can win the derby and a filly can't win the Belmont. It makes me think the winning of the triple crown is not far away. History is on the side of the naysayers, but the Kentucky Derby and the Triple Crown itself seem to often fly in the face of conventional wisdom.

i don't think anyone is saying he can't win the triple crown. what many are saying, such as myself, is that it's not a foregone conclusion. he has to earn what many before have tried to earn, and for one reason or another, didn't or couldn't.

Good Point. He has many roadblocks to get through first icluding his soundness. The last thing any of us want is a breakdown in the Preakness or the Belmont. Whether he does it or not, I just hope he makes it through safely.

me too

Good point. Leaving BB off your tickets (at least the top of your tickets) was the right play. It was a losing play, as things turned out, but it was the right play.

Picking a Derby favorite does not do much for a handicapper, everyone says, wow, he/she picked the favorite, how hard is that? However, picking a longshot that the capper gets lucky enough and wins can make a name for a handicapper. There really is not much incentive for these people to pick the favorite in the Derby. I remember the NY Post praising Debbie Little for days because she picked Giacomo.

I am not sure if this is the time to pick for "value" in a 20 horse field, if you key off the winner at least you have a shot at an over 3k tri and 58k super, only 3 of those 20 cappers had a shot at that.

I would think that the all button would of had to be used somewhere.

At a little over 2/1 there clearly was some big money put on BB....
For those that really liked him, the $3400 triple was definately hit-able....one over six over six for a buck is $30...I did not play any triples but both the filly and DOC were in my top seven...

Yeah, same here. I tossed him from my wagering expecting low payouts and instead had him hit over three horses I liked and played in the 2nd and 3rd spots on all my tickets and winced when I saw the payouts. I guess the Derby is the one race where you can just toss value out the window cause you are going to get a nice payout even with the chalk on top.

my point exactly with a 20 horse field and many derby only players playing colors and favorite numbers dont worry about the prices for the exotics they will be there no matter what. even in the oaks 1st, 3rd and 4th choice paid $239 for the tri and $1395 for the super. yes worry about value, but not on big days like this

Value is always a consideration. What you seem to be saying is not that using BB was not a value play, but that using BB was still a value play in the exotics, even at 2-1.

Fair enough, if you believed he was a lock. If you thought he was vulnerable, then keying him just wasn't the smart thing to do. I'm not so sure that all those pro cappers refused to play him just because he was the favorite. Maybe they honestly thought BB was't as good as claimed.

On these big days, you can use the favorite and go wide underneath with the rightful belief that you can still make money. Or you can swing for the fences by leaving out the public's choice with the rightful belief that you can make an obscene amount of money. Most people's bankrolls are not big enough to do both.

It's easy, with 20-20 hindsight, to point out that the tri had a decent payout with the favorite on top. Unfortunately, bets have to be made before the race. Given the information we had about BB before the race, I still say it wasn't a bad move to bet against him.

"For those that really liked him the tri was very hit-able"

"Fair enough, if you believed he was a lock."

A one over six over six Tri-Box for a buck is $90....so you did not need to see him as a lock just as long as you did not toss him completely...

??

1 x 6 x 5 = $30

unless you meant a 6 horse box which is $120.

1 over 6 over the same 6 is thirty possible combinations

none of the six gets put in both the 2nd and 3rd spot in the individual combination

I think it is the boxed part that was confusing. I was originally thinking $30 too but then realized you meant playing it with Big Brown in 1st, 2nd, and 3rd. I never considered that. Originally I was going to play the majority of my wagers without Big Brown and then a smaller group with him singled on top. Nothing with him in 2nd or 3rd. Then he drew the crappy post and I decided to not bother with the bets of him singled on top.

Maybe we're talking different zip codes. I only bet $150 this Derby. Because I did not see him as a lock, I was not willing to bet 3/5 of my bankroll on BB. Instead, I though the race was pretty wide open, and there was no way I could cover the possibilities I favored while dedicating that much money to a horse I didn't like to win.

As I said before, it makes perfect sense if you liked the horse enough to key him. If you didn't like him that much, and thought 2 or 3 or 4 others could win, then investing in BB wasn't a viable option.

Let's say you liked the 20 horse to hit the board and you wanted to play him in the the triple with the 5,6,9,10,14,16
Your tickets with the 20 keyed in first would be
20/5/6,9,10,14,16 =$5
20/6/5,9,10,14,16 =$5
20/9/5,6,10,14,16 =$5
20/10/5,6,9,14,16 =$5
20/14/5,6,9,10,16 =$5
20/16/5,6,9,10,14 =$5

do the same thing with the 20 keyed in 2nd and the 20 keyed in 3rd and it will cost you $90

or to say a few bucks...
a one over five over the same five with the single played in the win spot and the place spot would cost you $40

I was originally saying that if you really liked him (ie thought that he was going to win) then hitting half the triple with a $30 bet was reasonably do-able
later the discussion was if you liked him to hit the board but did not consider him a lock to win

the excuses given in this thread for the drf cappers not to pick Big Brown in the derby were his odds. so how come 18 out of the 20 cappers in tomorrows form pick BB to win. They like 1-2 better than 5-2 now?

In the derby he was running against 19 others coming out of the 20 hole, which only 1 horse ever won from. There were also other horses in the race that showed success that could have competed with BB. He was very lightly raced and could have regressed in that race. He defied odds and won. Tomorrow you will see 11 mules running against him. There is really very very limited if any talent in the 3 yr old crop other than BB and none of them are running tomorrow besides BB. Picking a horse to win in the derby that is 5-2 coming out of the 20 hole just does not make betting sense, however you should have protected your tri's,supers, etc. with him in it. Most of the people will pick BB to win tomorrow, but will not bet that race unless included with the pick 3,4,6. Most people actually bet the derby and tossed BB based on the odds. If he even just jogs well tom he will win going away, however I will not bet the race. My 2 cents

but if they didnt pick him at 5-2 in the derby, they should keep picking against him at 1-2 in the preakness I would think. if they are picking for value and not just to get a winner as im guessing only 3-20 picked in the derby but 18-20 in the preakness

It is not just value, there were other horses in the derby viewed as viable contenders that offered a more attractive price. You could have made a case for up to probably 5-8 different horses depending on the pace scenario in the derby. In the preakness there is no other horse in the race that is competitive with BB. Gayego who finished 17th in the derby is 8/1 and second choice on the morning line. Can you make a case for any horse to beat BB in the preakness? the answer is no. Could you make a case that numerous horses had just as good if not a better shot to win the derby considering all the factors other than BB? yes. There is value betting a horse at 8/1 who has just as good a chance to win as there is betting the 5/2 fav. BB defied odds and ran a great race, but most people will tell you that they would bet against him again in similar race with similar competitors. there is no value in betting BB in the Preakness, but there is really less value if you think no one has a shot to even be within 10 lengths of him to bet someone else.