Rule of Thumb for wagering at Keeneland

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

What was so bad about With a City winning that race? The field was dreadful. Would it have been so much better if Hemingway's Key or Superfly won? Seaside Retreat? Malameeze? More than Regal? Pair of Kings? Sharp Attack? Tahoe Warrior? Laity? Silent Times? Starspangled Gator? In a race full of nags someone has to win.

With A City's form on dirt was absolutely dreadful, and I mean woeful. It wasn't like he had ever been even remotely competitive in anything. He failed in claimers.
Seaside Retreat was just about as bad. When they ran 1-2 I said ok, thats it.
You devils advocate guys are piss poor. You can make that argument in hindsight with any horse.
So how much did you guys have on him? You musta made one hell of a killing because if you can justify him winning that race(of course now its in hindsight, as usual) then you should have had a bundle on him at those odds.
WHo exactly is bull****ting who here?
You guys wanna get on me because I think an impossible horse won and admit it. Then you guys wanna tell me how he figured. Gee, how much did you guys have on him then? If you didn't bet him then its pretty obvious who the bull****ters are.

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by oracle80

With A City's form on dirt was absolutely dreadful, and I mean woeful. It wasn't like he had ever been even remotely competitive in anything. He failed in claimers.
Seaside Retreat was just about as bad. When they ran 1-2 I said ok, thats it.
You devils advocate guys are piss poor. You can make that argument in hindsight with any horse.
So how much did you guys have on him? You musta made one hell of a killing because if you can justify him winning that race(of course now its in hindsight, as usual) then you should have had a bundle on him at those odds.
WHo exactly is bull****ting who here?
You guys wanna get on me because I think an impossible horse won and admit it. Then you guys wanna tell me how he figured. Gee, how much did you guys have on him then? If you didn't bet him then its pretty obvious who the bull****ters are.

I liked Silent Times so I didn't do too well in that race.

With a City actually broke his maiden on dirt and then ran 3rd and 4th in two stakes races before falling to the claiming ranks. He then won two in a row on the turf before flopping on the polytrack first race back off the layoff. I've said twice now that I think turf horses do well on polytrack and that is the only big difference in the surface. I'm yet to see an established dirt horse go to polytrack and not take to it. Lawyer Ron was not established when he ran on the poly and Lemons Forever has a first and a third in two starts on poly and they are running her in a G1 against older mares on it this weekend so her connections certainly don't think she has a problem with it.

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

I liked Silent Times so I didn't do too well in that race.

With a City actually broke his maiden on dirt and then ran 3rd and 4th in two stakes races before falling to the claiming ranks. He then won two in a row on the turf before flopping on the polytrack first race back off the layoff. I've said twice now that I think turf horses do well on polytrack and that is the only big difference in the surface. I'm yet to see an established dirt horse go to polytrack and not take to it. Lawyer Ron was not established when he ran on the poly and Lemons Forever has a first and a third in two starts on poly and they are running her in a G1 against older mares on it this weekend so her connections certainly don't think she has a problem with it.

Ok so basically you chastised me for saying I thought he was impossible and didn't bet him, and you made a case on how he could havebeen played, yet didn't bet a nickel on him at a zillion to one.
I understand.

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by oracle80

Ok so basically you chastised me for saying I thought he was impossible and didn't bet him, and you made a case on how he could havebeen played, yet didn't bet a nickel on him at a zillion to one.
I understand.

You just said that you completely gave up on handicapping polytrack because of With a City winning the Lane's End. I didn't bet him but can see how someone could have and considering the other horses in the field I don't think it was that unusual of an outcome. If I swore off betting every track where a field of mediocre 2yos or 3yos met in a stakes race and a longshot won I'd be out of tracks to play by now.

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

You just said that you completely gave up on handicapping polytrack because of With a City winning the Lane's End. I didn't bet him but can see how someone could have and considering the other horses in the field I don't think it was that unusual of an outcome. If I swore off betting every track where a field of mediocre 2yos or 3yos met in a stakes race and a longshot won I'd be out of tracks to play by now.

I never said I " gave up" betting polytrack and you guys spend a lotta time trying to lie about what I said.
I said it was my first and last time betting it.
I still try and handicap it, doesn't everyone? I still watch the races run there and still try and make sense of them.
I had the same view on Polytrack this past March when they ran those races as I did when it opened last fall and ran this past winter.
That was the only day I gave playing it a shot, mostly because of the big fields and stakes races that were being run.
I took a swing that day, didn't like what I saw, and after the With A City race, decided that I had the right idea in the first place.
You may have noted I said I also had been watching Poly in Woodbine(on tv). I still handicap the races and try to make sense of it, its just that up to this point they don't make sense.
You can handicap and follow something without BETTING on it. Its prudent to still pay attention to races being run there. But it won't get my gambling dollar.

Originally Posted by oracle80

I never said I " gave up" betting polytrack and you guys spend a lotta time trying to lie about what I said.
I said it was my first and last time betting it.
I still try and handicap it, doesn't everyone? I still watch the races run there and still try and make sense of them.
I had the same view on Polytrack this past March when they ran those races as I did when it opened last fall and ran this past winter.
That was the only day I gave playing it a shot, mostly because of the big fields and stakes races that were being run.
I took a swing that day, didn't like what I saw, and after the With A City race, decided that I had the right idea in the first place.
You may have noted I said I also had been watching Poly in Woodbine(on tv). I still handicap the races and try to make sense of it, its just that up to this point they don't make sense.
You can handicap and follow something without BETTING on it. Its prudent to still pay attention to races being run there. But it won't get my gambling dollar.

I agree with this 100%. I do the same thing with PolyTrack. I watch and watch and watch and handicap but dont bet. I only placed maybe 4 bets all meet at Turfway. Of course, I did tell you guys about Sunday Blessing $13.60. But I didnt share anything else because I wasnt even 50% confident. But I do the same as Oracle.

[TitanSooner]

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

You just said that you completely gave up on handicapping polytrack because of With a City winning the Lane's End. I didn't bet him but can see how someone could have and considering the other horses in the field I don't think it was that unusual of an outcome. If I swore off betting every track where a field of mediocre 2yos or 3yos met in a stakes race and a longshot won I'd be out of tracks to play by now.

agreed.


My rule of thumb for betting Keeneland.. bet whoever you want, it's your money!!! I'm no better handicappar than anyone else here, but I actually am looking forward to Hollywood Park for the first time, I am always sad when SA ends.

Geez.. get over it. Whining isn't going to keep these tracks from doing what is economical and good for the horses.