FINALLY: a good match up-- the Virginia Derby

[eajinabi]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

Really? It had nothing to do with the fact that the field was absolutely terrible? It was entirely IEAH and Dutrow's doing? That's interesting (read: mind-numbingly ignorant) reasoning.

Why in the hell do you think they put him in the suburban?????? BECAUSE the field was CRAP. They know how to pick thier spots. There was nothing on paper to even consider except only the fact that he was from IEAH/Dutrow

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by eajinabi

Why in the hell do you think they put him in the suburban?????? BECAUSE the field was CRAP. They know how to pick thier spots. There was nothing on paper to even consider except only the fact that he was from IEAH/Dutrow

Right. I'm sure you would've been saying the same thing about Pat Kelly had Naughty New Yorker won the race.

Blindly betting connections is a moron's strategy. Period.

[eajinabi]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

Right. I'm sure you would've been saying the same thing about Pat Kelly had Naughty New Yorker won the race.

Blindly betting connections (except sometimes with firsters) is a moron's strategy.

Who are you to call me a moron? The topic of this post about a match up between Gio Ponti and Sailors Cap. I merely introduced Court Vision as another contender. The field was not stellar in my opinion and to make a case based on connections is not a wild strategy. Mizzen Mast winning the Gold Cup had nothng to do with Frankel??? Mandella winning 4 BC races in 2003 was just coincidence???? You think blue collar trainer/owners win majority of G1 G2 races??? Think Again. The next time you bet the big races I suggest you have someone white-out all the trainer/owners/jockey so you can bet it based on figures alone. LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by eajinabi

The next time you bet the big races I suggest you have someone white-out all the trainer/owners/jockey so you can bet it based on figures alone. LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It really wouldn't be that difficult, though doing that wouldn't leave me with "figures alone."

People like you are the reason that underlays exist.

Good luck betting based just on figures and connections. You might as well pick the horse with the prettiest mane.

[eajinabi]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

It really wouldn't be that difficult, though doing that wouldn't leave me with "figures alone."

People like you are the reason that underlays exist.

Good luck betting based just on figures and connections. You might as well pick the horse with the prettiest mane.

You are yesterdays handicapper. You are not with the times. Check out my posting: http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=23944. See why I like Kilderry. Why do you think one trainer cant get a horse to walk but when he switches hands he is the next super horse. Who knows how they do it but they do it. I look at figures too but I have to put emphasis on his connections too.

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by eajinabi

You are yesterdays handicapper. You are not with the times. Check out my posting: http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=23944. See why I like Kilderry. Why do you think one trainer cant get a horse to walk but when he switches hands he is the next super horse. Who knows how they do it but they do it. I look at figures too but I have to put emphasis on his connections too.

THERE WAS NO TRAINER SWITCH WITH COURT VISION. Where the hell did I say that trainer switches don't have to be considered? You said that Court Vision was a good play because of his connections, and I pointed out how ridiculous that was considering that he's been with the same connections forever. Had he JUST BEEN SWITCHED to Mott, I would've agreed with you. But generally, connections mean next to nothing if it's the horse's ninth start with those connections. Your lack of comprehension is embarrassing.

It's downright hilarious that you call me "not with the times" when you admit to blindly betting connections, which may have been a relatively good strategy back BEFORE SPEED FIGURES WERE INVENTED.

[eajinabi]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

THERE WAS NO TRAINER SWITCH WITH COURT VISION. Where the hell did I say that trainer switches don't have to be considered? You said that Court Vision was a good play because of his connections, and I pointed out how ridiculous that was considering that he's been with the same connections forever. Had he JUST BEEN SWITCHED to Mott, I would've agreed with you. But generally, connections mean next to nothing if it's the horse's ninth start with those connections. Your lack of comprehension is embarrassing.

It's downright hilarious that you call me "not with the times" when you admit to blindly betting connections, which may have been a relatively good strategy back BEFORE SPEED FIGURES WERE INVENTED.

Whos betting blindly? I played him because he has back class, will improve second off to top it off his connections did not give up on him and just drop him to some restricted stakes. He was a very good underlay (based on M/L). Looking for value unlike chalk players like yourself. I said to myself why not take a shot? If he had a little better trip he would have won the darn thing.

I want in your words....

....why you think court vision ran well today?? Yes he ran well, not just OK. Probably his best figure yet. You said he was slow and you said it had nothing to do with his connections. Must be an act of God. No other explanation right?

[miraja2]

Originally Posted by eajinabi

You are yesterdays handicapper. You are not with the times. Check out my posting: http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=23944. See why I like Kilderry. Why do you think one trainer cant get a horse to walk but when he switches hands he is the next super horse. Who knows how they do it but they do it. I look at figures too but I have to put emphasis on his connections too.

Everybody know that if a horse switches connections, it is important to look at the barn switch for possible improvements. ateam already said that in this thread.
Court Vision definitely ran a pretty good race today (he beat my pick in Sailor's Cap) but that doesn't make you right in this particular discussion. Of course connections matter, but anyone that continues to bet horses in "big races" based solely on connections stands to lose in the long run. The past performances on the track are what matters the most.....by far.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by eajinabi

Why in the hell do you think they put him in the suburban?????? BECAUSE the field was CRAP. They know how to pick thier spots. There was nothing on paper to even consider except only the fact that he was from IEAH/Dutrow

they put frost giant in the suburban as he had been doing better of late, the assistant trainer (and his jock that day in the race) had spent a lot of time with frost giant, and he seemed to be coming around. he's been referred to as a head case.
as an aside, dutrow admitted he didn't have a thin dime on frost giant that day-so that sort of throws your theory a bit.

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by Danzig

they put frost giant in the suburban as he had been doing better of late, the assistant trainer (and his jock that day in the race) had spent a lot of time with frost giant, and he seemed to be coming around. he's been referred to as a head case.
as an aside, dutrow admitted he didn't have a thin dime on frost giant that day-so that sort of throws your theory a bit.

Not to mention this quote from Dutrow that it was almost entirely Rudy Rodriguez that got the horse to do what he did:

"I just figured, what’s a mile going to do?” Dutrow said of his decision. “I could have just screwed him up if I tried it. For the last two or three weeks, this horse settled down in the mornings. This was mostly Rudy, not just today, but in the mornings."

I wonder if Rudy Rodriguez is included in those "big money connections" this dude values so much.

[eajinabi]

Originally Posted by Danzig

they put frost giant in the suburban as he had been doing better of late, the assistant trainer (and his jock that day in the race) had spent a lot of time with frost giant, and he seemed to be coming around. he's been referred to as a head case.
as an aside, dutrow admitted he didn't have a thin dime on frost giant that day-so that sort of throws your theory a bit.

If a trainer doesnt bet on his horse is a sure sign the horse is not going to fire. He probaly ran him just for the excercise.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by eajinabi

If a trainer doesnt bet on his horse is a sure sign the horse is not going to fire. He probaly ran him just for the excercise.

from the print edition of bloodhorse, july 5:

'dutrow was mildly confident in Frost Giant, but felt he had little or no chance of beating Rising Moon, whom the trainer wagered on.'

he also said he thought the horse was good, but that he couldn't explain some of the horses poor performances in the past. that he felt the horse was responding to his training, and that he might as well take a shot. that 'if he's ever going to do it, it's got to be today, because he's been going unbelievably lately.'

he also said about the race running that he had given up on both his horses, and then watched in disbelief as frost giant came back. 'i forgot all about him. i was looking at the other horse (rising moon).'

and he didn't have a wager on either of his runners in the race.

[eajinabi]

Originally Posted by Danzig

from the print edition of bloodhorse, july 5:

'dutrow was mildly confident in Frost Giant, but felt he had little or no chance of beating Rising Moon, whom the trainer wagered on.'

he also said he thought the horse was good, but that he couldn't explain some of the horses poor performances in the past. that he felt the horse was responding to his training, and that he might as well take a shot. that 'if he's ever going to do it, it's got to be today, because he's been going unbelievably lately.'

he also said about the race running that he had given up on both his horses, and then watched in disbelief as frost giant came back. 'i forgot all about him. i was looking at the other horse (rising moon).'

and he didn't have a wager on either of his runners in the race.

I did bet on him.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by eajinabi

I did.

congrats.