With the recent defection of some logical pace candidates, Irish War Cry is looking more and more interesting as the potential pacesetter. If he saves ground, his secondary top could take it and should at least put him in the money.
I realize the likelihood of the bounce and while I certainly fear it, I\'m thinking as 3rd/4th choice in most pools, the reward outweighs the risk.
Even if he\'s 30% to make the lead and 50% to X, he seems like value, especially considering, anything close to his last makes him a contender even with a 3w,3w.
Is a ground saving \"1\" good enough?
Highly unlikely he\'s on the lead, there are at least two horses with connections that want to be on the lead and don\'t care where they finish. Saving ground is a different issue.
Mc990,
IWC is not going to make the lead. Especially after he rated so well in the Wood. Hard to believe they would deviate from that plan.
I think a more likely trip for IWC would be 2w/2w.
That said, I do think he is marginally the most likely winner. HE is the fastest horse in the race and has the winning profile from a pace perspective (can be in the race early and not navigate through 10+ horses).
The big negative number makes him a tougher read. Will guess that seminar takes a more negative view on this horse than I will based on the long history of horses coming in off negative numbers that didn\'t run back to them in the Derby.
I like having Graham Motion in my corner though.
Thinking the winner comes from the group of Irish War Cry, Practical Joke and McCracken.
Good luck.
Jim
Fast and Accurate is one of them. Irap may be the other.
Good Luck,
Joe B.
Wouldn\'t touch a trip projection prior to the draw. I\'d also include Classic Empire in that group of likely winners just out of respect for Casse.
IWC actually stands out to me for how extraordinary little value he offers. I wouldn\'t give him more than a 7% chance of winning this race.
Of course Sekrah,IWC is a 7% chance, fastest horse in the race, whose secondary top is even a contending figure.
But you like Always Dreamin, who will be the worst derby favorite in 30 years, if he goes off favored. A one figure horse off a 9 point improvement, who is training poorly and rank every day before he has to run 1 1/4. Even if 7% was close to accurate, which it isn\'t, he would still be twice as likely as AD win.
Been searching on the internet for odds to finish last. Figure as likely favorite, AD should be at least 30-1 to finish last. A great bet IMO.
At least lines are drawn.
You would be happy to lay 13.5/1 on IWC?
Exactly, that why it was a silly post.
Lay 13.5 to 1 against the fastest horse....
I got to agree with Jimbo here, 7 % seems low. If he runs his race he\'ll be tough to beat for anyone, the bounce probability is high but is it that high? It would be interesting to hear your reasoning on this one.
jimbo66 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Of course Sekrah,IWC is a 7% chance, fastest horse
> in the race, whose secondary top is even a
> contending figure.
>
> But you like Always Dreamin, who will be the worst
> derby favorite in 30 years, if he goes off
> favored. A one figure horse off a 9 point
> improvement, who is training poorly and rank every
> day before he has to run 1 1/4. Even if 7% was
> close to accurate, which it isn\'t, he would still
> be twice as likely as AD win.
>
> Been searching on the internet for odds to finish
> last. Figure as likely favorite, AD should be at
> least 30-1 to finish last. A great bet IMO.
>
> At least lines are drawn.
Yes, Always Dreaming, not my top choice for value, is a much better prospect to win this race than IWC. Good luck with your wagers in the Derby, jimbo.
I don\'t have to lay 13.5/1 on IWC so no, I\'m not making any macho side bets here. I\'m happy enough watching all the bad money go on him.
Atta Boy, Sekrah.
Good for you to stick up for yourself. Sometimes I think the name of this forum should be changed to \"Ask the Experts (if you dare).\"
It\'s a tough crowd for a tough game, but that doesn\'t make bullying legit.
I agree that AD has a legit shot. I might stick my own neck out once they draw the posts.
Leamas
I have to believe there are places to get head to head prop action on this one, if not to win, at least who beats who.
Leamas57 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Atta Boy, Sekrah.
>
> Good for you to stick up for yourself. Sometimes I
> think the name of this forum should be changed to
> \"Ask the Experts (if you dare).\"
>
> It\'s a tough crowd for a tough game, but that
> doesn\'t make bullying legit.
>
> I agree that AD has a legit shot. I might stick my
> own neck out once they draw the posts.
>
>
>
> Leamas
The same chirping chihuahuas every year like to pretend they solved this game. It\'s humorous to say the least.
You\'re going to get rained on for that one, deservedly.
On another post Sekrah made a great point if track comes up sloppy. Tapwrit mud breeding is incredible, top and bottom and going back 5 generations. I won\'t begin to discuss percentage probabilities (not competent) but with a back 1 1/2 there are worse ways to fill an exotic ticket ( or a win bet) at 40-1 if track comes up soupy.
IWC -135 vs. Always Dreaming +105.
Opened IWC -110 if I remember correctly.
Edit: That\'s a head to head prop (don\'t have to win race, just beat the other horse) posted at Wynn.
That is what I figured.
The problem with \'match up\' bets is that they often reflect \"sharp money\" as opposed to the win pool on Derby day.
12 years or so ago, when I first started using TG, thought I could make money playing matchups at Pinnacle sports, figuring I would use the sheets against people looking mostly at PPs. After about a month I realized that not only were the people setting the lines using sheets, but the people making the bets were \"sharps\" also.
IWC is going to go off at higher odds than AD. Several points higher looking at offshore.
Yet, IWC is -135 against AD. Ugh. -135 on an 8-1 shot to finish in front of a 9-2 shot.
I\'m more concerned with the probabilities of the horses winning/hitting the board relative to their odds.
The probability of a horse running an X is not mutually exclusive of his probabilities of winning the race. A head to head prop bet, governed by sports book limits really does not interest me at all when this is one of the few times each year where the potential exists for a real major score in the pari-mutual pools.
TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You\'re going to get rained on for that one,
> deservedly.
You should know by now how much I care about that.
rezlegal Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> On another post Sekrah made a great point if track
> comes up sloppy. Tapwrit mud breeding is
> incredible, top and bottom and going back 5
> generations. I won\'t begin to discuss percentage
> probabilities (not competent) but with a back 1
> 1/2 there are worse ways to fill an exotic ticket
> ( or a win bet) at 40-1 if track comes up soupy.
Shame, as I kind of had him on my radar without the wet track. Nice looking horse this week.
Then you shouldn\'t have cared enough to say it in the first place.
When they go low...
Furious Pete Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> When they go low...
Everyone gets butt-hurt when you knock their horse. It\'s a time honored \"Ask The Experts\" tradition. I\'ve seen it for 14 years here. That is their deep-thought analysis that you are knocking, how dare you!
What\'s hilarious is that I\'ve continued to say that AD is nowhere near my value target range I\'m looking for and won\'t be the focal point of my tickets. Doesn\'t matter I guess.
I\'ll post my final analysis Friday or Saturday morning and hopefully I land on some sort of combination that comes in for a sweet score. If not, \'til next year.
I\'ve noticed that, and given it a lot of thought lately. I\'m beginning to think that is a flaw of people in general. I see it everywhere I look. I mean, the talk about straw men.. I haven\'t exactly declared AD as the bet of the century either, but I guess one sees what one wants to see. I\'m sure I could be more nuanced, myself. I for one appreciate your voice on this board, and I\'m sure plenty is with me.
Yeah yeah I know.. I don\'t have the right to give my opinion on anything on this board bla bla bla.
Another very telling example:
Practical Joke -150 vs. Gormley +120 (both are 12/1 at the same book..)
Sekrah,
Don\'t sit on the fence. Chirping chihuahua comment aside, you have chirped as much as anybody about AD.
Not sure why you feel the need to post 40 times about a horse you are now saying isn\'t going to be a key for you.
Not sure who gets \"butt hurt\", but pretty sure when you look at your posts and my posts about IWC and AD, one of us is making an actual case on the horses and one is just saying that IWC has a 7% chance to win, without a fact or half fact to support.
Good luck,
Templeton,
Yep. The only thing Gormley has going for him is the support of RichieBee. (maybe that is enough to get him home!)
Regards,
Jim
The 40 posts is a direct consequence of how (the loudest) people on this board approach others opinions. It\'s not a healthy climate for discussion. It\'s like when one guy (usually very old guy) says something along the lines that \"climate change is just some commie hippie bullshit they\'ve made up so that they can take away all our freedom and money\", and suddenly the whole evening have passed discussing with a wall about this subject that you really wasn\'t that engaged in in the first place.
No. The response is, you and Sekrah have been doing more of it than anyone, and made it more personal. High road my ass.
Do you actually listen to yourself? One more like that and I start deleting them, after that you get barred. Nobody is throwing characterizations at you.
jimbo66 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sekrah,
>
> Don\'t sit on the fence. Chirping chihuahua
> comment aside, you have chirped as much as anybody
> about AD.
>
> Not sure why you feel the need to post 40 times
> about a horse you are now saying isn\'t going to be
> a key for you.
>
> Not sure who gets \"butt hurt\", but pretty sure
> when you look at your posts and my posts about IWC
> and AD, one of us is making an actual case on the
> horses and one is just saying that IWC has a 7%
> chance to win, without a fact or half fact to
> support.
>
> Good luck,
I rate his chances poorly. He looks fragile to me and Motion is handling him with kid gloves to get him to the gate. If he proves me wrong, congratulations. He won\'t be on my tickets. He\'s got the figures so he deserves that credit and has a chance based on that alone, but he does not strike me as a big time horse that can run two big efforts in a 30 day window.
TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> No. The response is, you and Sekrah have been
> doing more of it than anyone, and made it more
> personal. High road my ass.
I just don\'t get the personal attacks from some about horses that they don\'t own and really have no connection with. \"My sister is prettier than your sister\" makes more sense to me since you would have at least some skin in the game. Odds aren\'t known yet. Post positions aren\'t known yet. To me, this year\'s postings are different than previous years. Numbers theory -- OK. Workout theory -- OK. Bad weather theory -- OK. The rest a bunch of nonsense -- to me anyway.
On to the seminar.
Comparing sisters aside and acknowledging most of the aggression, and certainly the prattle comes from the weaker players, I feel McCraken is the most likely winner.
Many will discount his Bluegrass, perhaps others his performance/speed figures, foolishly in my mind, this Ghostzapper homer is a professional race horse. True, Ian had to call an audible at a bad time, yet this handsome colt has trained with aplomb and no rational reason he will not stay ten panels under scale weight.
bbb
Hey F Scott, that one was because you thought we hadn\'t figured out who you like?
sekrah Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Leamas57 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Atta Boy, Sekrah.
> >
> > Good for you to stick up for yourself. Sometimes
> I
> > think the name of this forum should be changed
> to
> > \"Ask the Experts (if you dare).\"
> >
> > It\'s a tough crowd for a tough game, but that
> > doesn\'t make bullying legit.
> >
> > I agree that AD has a legit shot. I might stick
> my
> > own neck out once they draw the posts.
> >
> >
> >
> > Leamas
>
>
> The same chirping chihuahuas every year like to
> pretend they solved this game. It\'s humorous to
> say the least.
I have a chihuahua. She\'s damn smart.
Just scanning through this thread so I may be ahead of myself. But Sek, how do you give IWC a 7% chance to win? What is that based on? By simple math, meaning we don\'t look at past performances at all, Fast And Accurate has a 5% chance to win because he is 1 of 20 horses, no? You take 2% away from FAA and give it to IWC that would get you to 7%.
How much faster is IWC than Fast and Accurate?
The odds of IWC beating Fast And Accurate are a lot more than 2%. So there must be someone else you really like that is eating up the balance. You really like AD that much?
mjellish Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Just scanning through this thread so I may be
> ahead of myself. But Sek, how do you give IWC a
> 7% chance to win? What is that based on? By
> simple math, meaning we don\'t look at past
> performances at all, Fast And Accurate has a 5%
> chance to win because he is 1 of 20 horses, no?
> You take 2% away from FAA and give it to IWC that
> would get you to 7%.
>
> How much faster is IWC than Fast and Accurate?
>
> The odds of IWC beating Fast And Accurate are a
> lot more than 2%. So there must be someone else
> you really like that is eating up the balance.
> You really like AD that much?
I have Fast and Accurate at <1%, I\'m not sure why you would put a number in my mouth there, Mike. I have AD at ~10%, which given the odds, makes him an underlay. . All of this will change with more clarity from post draw and weather
Weather looks bleak on the current update I just saw. If they keep the Fri turf races off with a dryish Fri night I think they can salvage Saturdays undercard. Hoping at least. A bunch of the Woodford horses have ran on the soft weeds before. Think it stays intact. As far as the Derby is concerned I might have to start from scratch. The unknown is no way to handicap. How does anyone know how AD will react to a wet surface on the lead? A guess? Pedigree? Oh - his daddy loved it at Monmouth that one time. None of this means one iota. Won\'t know till the gates swing open.
As others have mentioned, TAPwrat\'s dam, Appealing Zophie, won the 2006 Spinaway
Stakes at the Spa on a \"good\" track and I am assuming this is the low TG number
she earned as a 2YO. She went on to sell for 1.1M as a broodmare prospect; TAPwrat
himself is an ungraded stakes winner over a sloppy track.
Hot Dixie Chick, half sister to Always Dreaming, was tres grand vitesse on
off tracks as both a 2YO and 3YO.
Disclosing even more proprietary data, while issuing a \"small sample\" disclaimer,
Dialed In, sire of Gunnevera, has had 20 starters over an off track without a
winner.
Its all there in the data. Now I just have to wait for Frankie\'s final official
weather statement and some clarification as to whether Thunder Slow\'s UAE Derby
was indeed run over an off track.
Wasn\'t trying to put a number in your mouth Sek. Apologize if it came across that way. I was just confused by the statement. 7% sounds pretty low to me, but I guess you don\'t like IWC much. Certainly your prerogative. Who knows, you could be right.
FWIW, in the last 10 runnings, 22 horses have come in with the Top-Pair pattern. 3 ran new tops, 4 paired their top, 3 ran off races, and 12 X\'ed.
Jerry stats can always be looked at in a way that benefits the viewer. In this specific case I am looking at third race of 3 year old campaign coming off a pair(makes me feel better about McCrack). Not really worried so much about 2 year old foundation. Obviously that plays a factor into my overall handicapping but I believe horses improve most third race of 3 year old campaign.
Recent examples
Nyquist 3,3,-0
Gun Runner 5,5,2
Firing Line 1,1,-1
If the horse is running 4th off bench in derby it changes my opinion on a horse.
Some bad ones, Gemologist,Trinniberg, Union Rags
This is the letter definition of anecdotal evidence.
More fun facts (always FWIW). Horses coming into Derby with just 2 races as 3yo. (Since 2010)
Starters 36
Tops 7
Pairs 8
Off 7
X 14
Jerry,
As opposed to the 29 posts about the weather, I think your post points out something interesting. Was hoping TGJB was going to touch on this in the seminar. For two decades the thought process was 3 or 4 preps was ideal (as a 3 year old).
It has struck me that horses with 2 preps had done better recently, but I didn\'t have the data.
The breed has changed, is less \"sturdy\" than it used to be (drugs maybe but whatever the cause). It strikes me that 2 preps and being 3rd off the layoff would be better now than it was in the 80\'s or 90\'s.
Yes, I am biased a bit on the stat as I am trying to convince myself that \"two prep\" Practical Joke can run 1 1/4 miles.
Jim
I wouldn\'t consider that anectodal evidence. I am using actual evidence just not as broad as Jerry pulled because it doesn\'t relate to the horses I am looking at. A horse coming fourth of bench is different then third etc. That is my opinion. Doesn\'t mean the evidence is false.
Jerry those stats aren\'t bad. 41% pair/top
Jerry you seem to enjoy. How about horses coming into derby with two starts as 3 year old and pairing?
There is a lot of good info relating to this in the last couple of seminars.
Jimbo-- There\'s an outside chance TGJB touched on it. I mean is going to touch on it...
It certainly wasn\'t a problem for Bodemeister, Nehro, Eight Belles, or Smarty Jones.
If Practical Joker wins on Saturday, I will stop looking at derby prep replays, charts, patterns, pedigree, seminars, past Derby numbers, past performances etc. and simply bet Chad Brown on the first Saturday in May for the rest of my life.
Jimbo: partly cloudy, high 67. LOL
Good Luck,
Joe B.
jbrown007 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I wouldn\'t consider that anectodal evidence. I am
> using actual evidence just not as broad as Jerry
> pulled because it doesn\'t relate to the horses I
> am looking at. A horse coming fourth of bench is
> different then third etc. That is my opinion.
> Doesn\'t mean the evidence is false.
Hi Jbrown007, I think I was a bit too quick to the trigger. I should have said something more like this:
I agree that the 2yo paired-top pattern is a healthy/promising one, in fact I don\'t think it\'s very debatable.
I think typically when a person refers to names vs. numbers, it\'s a giveaway that they\'re talking about anecdotes.
Anecdotes are not by definition false evidence, but they are weak evidence. Alternatively, if you\'re looking at the 6 horses you mentioned as your whole sample, then you have a sampling/sample size problem.
As others have suggested, there are revealing statistics in the seminars that touch on this subject.
Joe,
I don\'t get your point at all. Practical Joke winning hardly makes all the points you mention irrelevant.
The horse has MAYBE one problem. Distance. Could be a fatal one. But fits on all other points you mention. Fits better than all or most on all those points as well, especially with TG as your figure choice to view the horse through.
Keep an eye on the weather for us though....
Jim
Jim: What does the number of preps he has going into the race have anything to do with his ability to negotiate the distance?
Good Luck,
Joe B.
Joe,
The number of preps he has coming into the race has nothing to do with the distance. But it has to do with his chances of running a new top.
The horse can or can\'t get the distance. If he CAN, it doesn\'t mean he can win. But if he can, and he also runs a new top, he stands a good chance to win with a trip.
You went off on a tangent, if Practical Joke wins then replays, figures, preps, etc.etc.etc. all don\'t matter,
That is nonsense. You have been on this board for a long time to not look at PJ\'s sheet and know he has about a perfect string of 6 races as you can have going into the Derby. Him winning is HARDLY illogical.
He has a major hurdle. But is a Grade 1 winner with an excellent 2 year old foundation and despite what you might think, has gone FORWARD with distance this year.
And he is 15-1.
How do you explain his hanging last race. No question he hung. Distance? Short? Didn\'t want to pass. I liked him a lot last time. I fear he just didn\'t want to pass the winner.
Strike
He lost 47 feet of ground to the winner.
U can call that distance limitation if u like
Or a bad trip
Or maybe both
At 15-1, I am going for bad trip as the reason
At 9/2 I would say distance limitations
Good luck
Jim
Jim,
Agree with the good looking sheet. As good as any in the race. If my eyes were looking only at that, then he\'s a major player.
Watching replays of his 2 turn races however shows me a horse that I cannot see moving up as the distances increase.
Then again it\'s Chad Brown and this is as wide open as I\'ve ever seen.
Good Luck,
Joe B
15-1 on a horse with arguably the best looking sheet in the race.
If you\'re going to pick nits with this horse, then you may as well pass the race. You\'re gonna find warts with all of them.
If Mccracken takes too much action, I would have no problem at all making this horse a major key.
I concur on PJ. There\'s knocks but more pros than most of the field. One of the few overlays I see as of right now.
P-Dub Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 15-1 on a horse with arguably the best looking
> sheet in the race.
>
> If you\'re going to pick nits with this horse, then
> you may as well pass the race. You\'re gonna find
> warts with all of them.
>
> If Mccracken takes too much action, I would have
> no problem at all making this horse a major key.
If it wasn\'t the Derby,I would pass on it. Saturday is Christmas and all degenerate horseplayers looking for 3 wise men to give them the most likely winner. Why else would we all read a thousand posts on one race.
Good Luck,
Joe B
fwiw, Trakus from the Keeneland site has difference in distance traveled between Irap and PJ as 20 feet, 6014 to 6034.
It\'s tedious for me and easier for the host to do. I expect him to provide that information in the seminar.
He had every chance to pass and should have. That stretch run is the only thing keeping me from pouncing. But I certainly don\'t hate him and like you say at 15-1 there\'s plenty of value. But he has to win that race last out?
Boarded up,
I don\'t know. Pretty sure there is some good material on this forum from a few years back where I said that super saver has no shot to win the derby when he couldnt pass line of David, a slow horse, in the Arkansas derby.
SekRah, Michael D and a few others liked his pattern, his 2 year old top at CD and his progressive 3 year old line
We know how that turned out.
Not saying it is the same thing, but the number is the number
Jim
Yeah, I\'m not saying he has no shot. I like him a fair amount myself, but not passing the maiden the entire length of the stretch is what has been keeping me from fully being able to commit.
Honestly I can\'t remember a year when I was fence sitting this hard the day before the draw. Tomorrow is usually conformation or toss, this year I\'m still studying? None without issues..
The main play on super saver was the tactical speed and trip... he was the best candidate to run his number based on his running style. I see nothing off that sort for practical joke. I see a great thoro sheet and almost assuredly another bad trip.
If that was an off track then they don\'t have mud.
BTW, a pair up won\'t get it done.
After doing some of my voodoo figure adjusting this morning, I\'m going to have a very hard time leaving Practical Joke out of my \"A\" list if he draws well today. That\'s a healthy looking race horse right there.