Lukas/Lewis said that they plan to run Going Wild in the Derby along with stablemate Consolidator. I guess they were encouraged by his performance in the Wood...or maybe they are thinking that they might just have him set some torrid fractions in the Derby to try and soften up Bellamy Road, High Limit and the other front runners...
If High Limit freaks in the Blue Grass (and I think he might), this could shape up to be one of the most interesting Derbies in quite some time...
Chris
Consolidator runs from on the pace as well. I doubt the Lewises and Lukas would enter Going Wild as a rabbit and even if they did, the horse couldn\'t come within shouting distance of Bellamy Road at any time during the Wood. They need a better rabbit. Maybe the three year old version of Don Six, if he exists.
Just curious, are you reading a \"breakout\" in High Limit\'s pattern for this week\'s race, or is that just your gut feeling?
I like the horse and am hoping that as poorly as the other Louisiana Derby runners have come back, that High Limit might go off as 2nd or 3rd choice, behind Sun King and Consolidator.
Perhaps the Lewises could move GOING WILD over to Scott Lake. Then we could have a MONARCHOS type Derby with the half going in :44 3/5; 6f in 1:09 4/5.
Good Luck,
Joe B.
Going Wild may need some help graded-earnings-wise to get in. He\'s 26th with only $47,500 on the list Churchill Downs put out today. I read a quote from Lukas\'s assistant saying that GW\'s Wood was too bad to be believed, so they\'re drawing a line through it. Maybe they\'ll try the Lexington if they need earnings.
The interesting horse, earnings-wise, is Bandini. At $60,000, he\'ll have to do well against a tough Blue Grass field this weekend or be in jeopardy of missing the Derby.
Has anyone read whether John Velazquez is riding Afleet Alex or Bandini this weekend? I assume he\'d prefer Bandini, but I\'m wondering what kind of commitment he had to make to supplant Jeremy Rose.
jimbo,
\"I like the horse and am hoping that as poorly as the other Louisiana Derby runners have come back, that High Limit might go off as 2nd or 3rd choice, behind Sun King and Consolidator.\"
I don\'t think the public will put too much weight on the performances of the other horses coming out of the LA Derby. They weren\'t much going in. High Limit crushed them. He is so lightly raced people will expect him to move forward. He\'s a Frankel horse.
CH,
so you think High Limit goes favored over Sun King and Consolidator?
I disagree on Sun King, but you might be right about Consolidator.
I think Sun King will be favored, High Limit second choice, Consolidator 3rd choice and Bandini 4th choice.
Going Wild has a lot more front end speed than he\'s made apparent in his last two races. The key will be the earnings but if he does get into the Derby, be prepared for a change of pace and when they start stopping dont be surprised if this one is there after some of the lower odds others have long before said sayonara.
Post Edited (04-11-05 16:53)
jimbo,
I don\'t know.
Sun King has a bit of reputation as Zito\'s #1 horse and Zito is going so well that he\'s going to take a lot of money just on that. Maybe he will be favored, but I can\'t see High Limit going off much longer.
It\'s a very high quality prep.
NY Boy Zito is a \"HomeBoy\" at Keeneland. All of the $2.00 bettors play him there. Although Cliff\'s Edge went off over 5-1 last year to Lionheart.
NC Tony
tony,
i think zito lives in lexington now......
going wild? on TG, bellamy was seven lengths faster than GW going into the wood. how could they both have been 5/2? that was some of the worst betting i have seen in a while.
Michael-- one reason for BR and GW going off the same price was that Beyer had GW much faster-- he gave his maiden win 104, and two others better than BR\'s best, a 96. As I said earlier, he missed that one by 8-9 of his points, and he had GW wrong (and has SoCal horses too fast in general, although he has started adjusting). Ragozin had BR about right on the scale, but has had the ones coming out of the NY preps too fast right along. Don\'t know about GW.
my father liked GW. i tried to tell him about the # difference, but he thinks you sheet guys are evil, so he didn\'t listen.
Just curious, any idea how Beyer would miss the Bellamy Road race by 8-10 of his points? It couldn\'t have been ground loss, he was in the one path all the way around the track (pretty sure). Weight can\'t account for 8-10 points.
those blow-out races over the new GP surface must have been pretty tough to put #\'s on - especially given the way the wind can swirl around out there (i think wind can have a big affect on the one turn miles).
Post Edited (04-11-05 18:17)
I\'ll concede GW didn\'t have Bellamy Road\'s last number or the 2yo 5\'s but BR was a one number horse going into the Wood and 5-2 wasn\'t a bonanza on either horse in the circumstances and if some think it was more power to em.
GW didn\'t lift a foot on that track and apparently came back sound. (We\'ll see about that) If you\'re dismissing GW on the figs going in and the result coming out thats logical but I tend to think we haven\'t heard the last of GW yet. He needs to have the perfect race BR just had and things will take care of themselves.
With a one turn mile wind definitely can be a big factor, and though I didn\'t look up the wind on the day that could be what happened. But in the end there\'s a lot of judgement involved, especially when it comes to giving out new tops, and sometimes figure makers just don\'t want to pull the trigger and go out on the limb. That\'s what happened with Beyer and Ragozin with War Emblem\'s first big one (the race BEFORE the Illinois Derby), and it happened to Andy again last year with SJ in the Rebel. Boy, did I not want to give that number-- but the next 2 or 3 horses paired up and it fitted with the day, so I had no choice, and it turned out to be right.
This one is a bit further back, but Beyer blew one of Mossflower\'s allowance races by about 15 points, leadind her to paying $11 in her G1 win in the Hempstead next out when she should have looked like a stand out. The only reason for his low figure was that it just looked too damn high best I could tell.
TGJB,
Last year\'s SJ race was a high profile error on Beyer\'s part. In an interview after the Preakness he sort of admitted the mistake in a backdoor fashion. I can\'t remember the exact quote, but it was something along the lines of \"Some of SJ\'s other figures could be conservative\".
I didn\'t see the TG figures for War Emblem until well after the fact. Fortunately I cashed that one anyway. :-)
Keep in mind about Going Wild he has already run 6 furlongs in 108 and change. Also, Winning Colors pulled a tank job in her race at Turfway before the Breeders Cup Distaff when she almost took down Personal Ensign. If Going Wild is still reasonably healthy he will definately be used as a siphon for those reluctant to rate speed horses just like Honour and Glory was used to siphon Unbridleds Song.
You can book that one.
This race may have more early speed than any Derby since Fredinand won. Groovy, Bachelor Beau, Zapaleta all pure sprinters. The Monarchos year most of the jocks just
lost their minds and any clue of the Pace.
Jimbo,
In response to your first point: Going Wild will have no trouble going 45 and change and 1:09 and change in the Derby if that is what the connections want to do (and as Silver Charm also mentioned, Wayne has used this tactic several times before in the Derby).
In response to your question: I am sure that I am not the only one on this board that thinks High Limit is likely to improve in the Blue Grass. The question is by how much?
Is he an early developer that is not likely to develop much at 3? If so, he may only improve a point or so (or maybe none at all).
Or is he another freak similar to Smarty Jones who is fast at 2 but still capable of the additional development you normally see in healthy, high-class colts from late summer in their 2yo year to the spring of their 3yo year. If so, given the trainer, he could jump 3-5 pts in the Blue Grass which would put him in the pre-derby freaky fast category along with Smarty Jones and the new star on the block - Bellamy Road.
To have 2 such horses in the same Derby both of which seem to prefer making their own pace (with other quality speed including a possible rabbit thrown into the mix to make it a bit more interesting) along with a quality group of second tier horses (from a figure standpoint) such as High Fly, Sun King, Blues & Royals, Bandini, Noble Causeway, Consolidator and Greely\'s Galaxy (many of which would be first tier in a typical year) could make for a great Derby and TC this year from both a betting and racing fan standpoint.
Chris
P.S. If High Limit does run a big race in the Blue Grass, keep this in mind on Derby day – a horse owner and friend of mine once had Frankel autograph a TG sheet of one of his horses and this is what he wrote next to his name, \"My horses don\'t bounce.\"
GP Horses seem to be holding up very well as they ship out too. SA horses with the exception of the Galaxy horse have not so far this year. Same for FG horses (that run regularly).
Just my observation.
derby,
\"I am sure that I am not the only one on this board that thinks High Limit is likely to improve in the Blue Grass. The question is by how much?\"
I think the extent of any improvement may not be fully reflected in his Blue Grass figure vs. the prior one because this time he\'s going to be running against actual race horses that are going to press him and make him earn it. IMO, if he runs a slightly faster figure, that would be fairly impressive improvement considering how easy he had it last time. If he runs a much faster figure, that would be freaky.
Post Edited (04-12-05 08:57)
Chris,
I will just agree to disagree about Going Wild. If he runs, I feel he will have no impact on the race. To me, when a horse with natural speed stops showing it early in races, that is one of the best signs of a horse that is \"off form\". Going Wild showed less early pace in the SA race, then even less in the Wood. Yes, on his best day, he can run 45, 1:09. He has already. But he won\'t in the Derby, at least that is what I think. A non-factor.
As for High Limit\'s improvement in the Blue Grass, I understand that you would expect improvement based on his 2-year old numbers and with any kind of maturation, he should run better. But two things. First, wouldn\'t you have expected him to run better in the LA Derby from a figure standpoint, considering he was \"first time Frankel\" and had 6 months to mature. With a different trainer, I would say that I expect big improvement second time out, but Frankel\'s horses fire fresh, which brings me to my second point. I have ready Jerry comment many times that Frankel\'s pattern with horses is that they fire their best figures off the layoff and then don\'t bounce, but also don\'t improve during a campaign much. You really expect a jump forward in the BlueGrass anyway? I don\'t really disagree, because I like the horse too, but I wonder about improvement in the Bluegrass. Frankel manages his 3-year olds a little different and I am hoping that he didn\'t have him fully cranked for the LA Derby, because he will have to run faster to beat Sun King, Consolidator and Bandini. The other factor that concerns me is that Frankel is a \"sheets guy\". I guess he has some relationship with Ragozin. As such, he has to know that if High Limit fires a bullet 3 weeks out from the Derby that probably does not set him up well for the Derby and makes him a bounce candidate. If he knows/believes that, he may not have High Limit fully cranked for the Blue Grass.
Bottom line for me is that 5-2 is a good bet on High Limit, when you factor everything in, assuming the field stays in tact.
Jimbo,
\"5/2 is a good bet on High Limit.\"
Really? There are several reasons why High Limit may not win the Blue Grass that have nothing to do with the horse\'s ability. You point out a few of them elsewhere in your post. And you still think 5/2 is a good bet? In a competitive race that he\'s not pointing for? I\'m kind of surprised that this is your conclusion.
HP
High Limit caught a speed conducive strip last and I\'m hoping and praying this horse and Bellamy Road both get to Churchill in good form and that the super has the strip fair for the race.
This is handicapping at its finest.
I have to mildly disagree with the idea that good layoff trainers like Frankel bring their horses back 100%. They may be darn close to 100%. They may even run figures that approximate their top figure when they come back against soft fields that are being used to prep them for a main event. However, I don\'t think they are actually 100% very often based on studies I have done on how horses perform off layoffs when they are thrown to the lions in Grade I races.
In the case of High Limit, even if Frankel had the horse pretty cranked up, I would still expect this horse to move forward a bit because he\'s so darn lightly raced and a 3YO.
My main issue with him is that this is probably going to be the first time in his career there\'s going to be another horse of enough quality in the race capable of running with him or pressuring him a little early. Then someone else is likely to take a shot at him late.
This is the type of race that seperates the really good ones from the pretenders. It\'s his chance to shine.
Post Edited (04-12-05 11:46)
I think HIGH LIMIT runs a Peace Rules type Blue Grass and everyone else runs for second.
You know Zito will not push SUN KING who is likely to come from off the pace on Saturday....ditto BANDINI. Not sure Pletcher even wants to go to the Derby at this point. Owners may win out, but this horse would be better off waiting for Pimlico.
Good Luck,
Joe B.
What about Consolidator?
I\'m definitely not expecting any duel type action, but all three of those others are presser types. I can\'t imagine High Limit loafing around on a loose lead until the top of the stretch with three quality pace prompters in there. This is too valuable a race to just hand over the check.
Post Edited (04-12-05 13:14)
CH---
Not sure he\'ll press this time. Looked too sharp off the layoff which could be why he was stalking. I think that HIGH LIMIT is capable of setting faster fractions and does not need to loaf in order to finish.
It will be an interesting race to watch, not bet.
Good Luck,
Joe B.
Jimbo-- coupla points on High Limit. First of all, the guy who had him before (A. Dutrow) is an extreme move-up artist, so the \"first time Frankel\" situation is a little different. Second, when we have talked about Frankel layoff patterns and what the horse does later we are generally talking about older horses. It may or may not be a little different for 3yos, but you can find sheets for Empire Maker, Peace Rules and Midas Eyes in the archives.
This is a real interesting horse, and a real interesting Blue Grass. I don\'t remember any horse that was both blindingly fast at two AND handled this way at three, not starting until mid March, races spaced, two starts before the Derby-- it\'s what I would have done.
I mentioned that I had played the field in pool 2 ($500) at 6-1. This time I bet High Limit (300 @13-1) and Rockport (200 @19-1), because it looks to me like someone will have to go negative to win this, and they\'re about the only other two I can see running new tops that fast. This gives me the ones I consider the 4 most likely winners (right now, anyway), and a few others tossed in (like the Ill. Derby winner) locking in 5/2 to 3-1.
And as you might notice, all 4 will have 2 starts or less going into the Derby.
Joe,
I\'m actually considering Bandini, but only if the price is high enough. I don\'t dislike any of the others. There are very minor things about each of them I\'m not crazy about and they will all probably be shorter in odds. That\'s all. If Bandini didn\'t have his training interrupted, I would have liked him in the Florida Derby and I would probably like him more here. I\'m a huge Pletcher fan and I think this is going to be a very good horse. Not sure he\'s going to be ready for this assignment Saturday, but at a certain price I might take a shot.
Post Edited (04-12-05 14:18)
HP,
As for 5-2 being a good bet, let me explain why.
I don\'t like Consolidator. I thought the three year olds in California were not much and to me, the SA Derby proved that. I would give 5-1 on a horse in the SA Derby making the Superfecta (not sure how many are running).
I think Bandini is a little slow on the numbers compared to High Fly and I don\'t like the training setback and new schedule. I thought the Fountain of Youth was a pretty unimpressive race. High Fly ran much better in the Florida Derby.
That leaves Sun King. I have to admit I am slightly biased against Sun King, having bet him mildly in the Champagne and then going \"all in\" on him in the BC where I just needed him to run 2nd to cash pretty well. I am not convinced he wants 1 1/8 or longer, as he flattened out in the BC and also ran better in the 1 turn GS race, than the Tampa Bay Derby. I know he wasn\'t asked to run much in the Tampa race, but still, the figure was a little slow for me.
High Limit ran a \"1\" as a two year old and then pairing it up in his first race this year, while on his wrong lead and appearing to run green in the stretch.
I think he will run faster on Saturday, although not as fast as Chris thinks he will run. Based on the probables, he figures on the lead and in the 1 path. Consolidator will probably be off his flank, in the 2 path and Sun King will have to negotiate a path from behind. Plus, the race is run at Keenland, where being on the lead is usually a good thing.
Even if he just improves 1 point, I think a \"0\" will likely be enough to win the race, the way it sets up.
If I think he is 40-50% to win the race, then 5-2 becomes a prime bet for me. If he goes off 2-1, I might bet less, but I will still hammer him.
Joe B,
If you think High Limit runs a Peace Rules type race and \"everybody else runs for 2nd\", why wouldn\'t you bet High Limit, considering he probably won\'t be the favorite, Sun King will be.
JB,
You mention that you have the field at 6-1, as well as High Limit at 13-1 and Rockport at 19-1. Then you said that gives you the 4 most likely winners, in your opinion.
Just curious, who is your 4th? You only mention the three.
Blues and Royals. And I agree about SK in the BG, as I will say in ROTW.
Jimbo--
I think HL will be 3-1. I normally will not play to win at odds below 5-1. If I am going to do anything, it would be looking for value underneath.
I am not a SUN KING fan, so I would be getting value just by tossing him out of the exactas. I\'ve been doing lousy with the 3 yo preps, so I\'m probably better off just watching and observing. The real value comes in less than 4 weeks.
Good Luck,
Joe B.
Jimbo,
I guess that\'s where we part the ways. For me, there is no such thing as a \"prime bet\" at 5/2. I have to get a better return, even if I\'m playing Secretariat.
Good luck.
HP
HP,
Fair enough. I will be the first to admit, I bet too many races and have too many \"prime bets\".
For me, I have no price tolerance on a prime bet, it is based on my view of a horse\'s percentage chance to win versus his price with 2 minutes to post. I calculate an ROI based on those two numbers and then make a bet, if the math works out to a pretty strong ROI.
Granted, my view of a horse\'s percentage chance to win is not exactly science, which is why this is gambling and not science.....
Jimbo,
Those who have the game reduced totally to \"science\" can normally be found wandering about the BIG A looking for carfare.
miff,
\"Those who have the game reduced totally to \"science\" can normally be found wandering about the BIG A looking for carfare.\"
Someone actually still goes to the Big A?
:-)
Class,
Not many for sure, when the weather gets real nice I go very often. Just 25 minutes from staten island.I mainly go to hang with some friends who are still involved in the racing game.
Also a great excuse to go to Don Pepe restaurant on Lefferts Blvd.
If you plan to take a stand against one or more of the faves in the exotics and you are looking for a longshot to help boost the price, you might want to consider the one horse that nobody has mentioned - Closing Argument. He has a live line and comes into the race fresh and other than High Limit looks to me like the horse in the race most likely to improve. The obvious negative is the hiccup in his training that caused him to miss the Fla Derby.
CA is already faster than Bandini and Bandini has already developed quite a bit this year and is not that likely to move forward for Pletcher in the 4th race of his 3yo campaign.
CA is a couple points slower than Consolidator but note that Consolidator has reacted to every one of his efforts in the past and his last (the big fig) was earned on a funky wet fast track. Of course, the Lukas horses always seem to run well when they ship in the spring from CA to Kentucky so you have to factor that in with this one.
CA is slower than Sun King but it looks like SK may have reacted to his big effort off the bench. Zito is certainly on fire and high on the horse and maybe you can excuse his last but it is usually not a good idea (from a betting standpoint) to make excuses for the likely favorite in the race.
Anyway, a small field but an interesting race nonetheless and it sounds like it will be the ROTW this week and likely to get a lot more discussion on the board prior to post time.
Good luck to all.
Chris
P.S. Keep in mind that the Blue Grass is probably the most prestigious race in America after the TC, BC and Travers; so, even though these guys all would love to win the Derby and don\'t want to see their horses peak too soon, don\'t expect them to send their horses out at 80% for this race (despite what they may say before or after the race). If that was the plan, then they would have chosen a different path to the Derby.
Miff:
I go to AQ from SI almost every Wednesday and Friday. My personal best from the VZ to AQ is 28 minutes. If you are doing it in 25, you are certainly in negative territory as far as your TG # goes. The ride home Friday is always a nightmare
I\'ve never been to Don Pepe\'s on Lefferts. My friends from Brooklyn and Queens always insisted that New Park Pizza on Cross Bay is among the best in the City, but to me it is only slightly better than NYC Board of Ed cafeteria pizza.
Rich,
Trust me, if you like Italian food(garlic especially) try Don Peps. Cash only, family style and you are bound to get a couple of tips from the owners and trainers that make up alot of the customers.
My 25 min (app) trip sometimes is a nightmare when the Belt gets backed up. I\'m usually not on my way back until 7/8 in the evening. Right after tax time(end April for me)Lets meet at the BIG A or BIG sandy in early May.
Chris
Both Keeneland and Oaklawn have Closing Argument running in their races.I read somewhere that he shipped to Oaklawn today.Not sure what the deal is.
Mr Sword is running in the BG and gets Bailey.He worked today at Keeneland in 57 and change and had the clocker raving.I guess Bailey is getting on all of the Paraneck junk now.
I think High Limit will be tough on Saturday also,but Consolidator is going to make him work in the lane.Lukas has him dead fit and he\'s won over the surface.I don\'t see the others being involved.
Chris,
I also think CA is a live horse. I used him in the Holy Bull with High Fly and got split out by that horror trip for High Fly. I thought he ran well that day. Unfortunately, he\'s been out for over 2 months. I think he probably missed a lot more than a few days like Bandini. I\'d have a really tough time backing a horse off more than a two month layoff coming into a tough Grade 1 race unless it laid over the field or the price was really big. Using him for second seems reasonable though.
By the way, I agree on Consolidator. That was a freaky sort of wet-fast track. It certainly didn\'t hurt to be on the pace that day.
That is getting to the crux of the race.
Consolidator is no iron clad lock to run back to his last race.
Sun King is no iron clad lock to run back to his prior race considering how slow his last was.
High Limit has almost unlimited potential, but he yet to run a fast race at a route of ground where he wasn\'t loose/walking on the lead against \"second\" or \"no string\" horses (not to mention other things that may have been working in his favor). That won\'t happen this time.
If there was another really good horse I would be happy to go \"fishing\" at a big price and allow someone with potential to prove themselves against me.
Post Edited (04-12-05 18:08)
Big,
If that is the case, I suggest you book any bets on CA in the BG...:-)
Chris
P.S. Not surprised to see the rider switch on Mr. Sword, that last ride in the Spiral cost me (and I am sure others) some money...
Mr. Sword worked in 57&4. That is a sensational workout because Kee has not been as fast as usual so far. No other horse broke 1:00.
You better watch out for this horse fellas and, if he runs to that work, Bailey won\'t even be on High Fly as you were all so sure of ten days ago.
I think Consolidator will be the favorite and should be. His last race is terrific. He breezed 58 flat at CD recently so I wouldn\'t look for a bounce.
Two horses won from well off the pace on San Felipe day.Another came from far back to just miss.Consolidator had never shown an affinity for wet tracks in his two prior attempts.He didn\'t freak on a wet fast speed favoring track.His race was legit.
I have no clue if he can repeat or move forward on Saturday,but questioning his San Felipe effort because of the surface is kind of foolish.If anything, the Fairgrounds on La Derby day was the track with the major speed bias.
Speed crazy Spanish Chestnut is now part of the field.
tabor using a rabbit?
this is a $500k horse he is sacrificing here. think he might want this race?....
pletcher said last month that bandini probably wasn\'t going to the ky derby if he missed the fla derby. is this the big one for bandini?
...........
HL will have to be a superstar to win this race on the lead against this field in his second start of the year. this isn\'t the field peace rules faced..... although the angle might get overplayed a bit. you HL fans might just get a better price on a great horse.
Post Edited (04-12-05 21:35)
Spaninsh Chesnut is now in. he may also offer early Speed to the race. Will be very interesting now.
NC Tony
big18741,
All IMHO....
I can\'t be certain if there was a bias that day or not because I don\'t know the horses in CA at all, but as I said \"it certainly didn\'t hurt to be on the pace that day\" based on my review of those charts.
One of the closers that won closed off a 21.1 \"42.3\" pace late in the day. (Is that even right? The teletimer showed 41.3 which I assume is impossible. It must have been 43.3)
The other closer was a 1st time starter that also looks like he may have been helped by a 3 way duel. We have no PPs to work with when it comes to him, but maybe he\'s just a tank. The lead horse finished 2nd.
One thing I am almost certain of is that when there\'s a bias (especially when the track is wet), competent jocks usually catch on after the first couple of races and adjust their styles by becoming more aggressive. Maybe that\'s what happened in at least one of those races. Over-aggressiveness can negate any advantage to be gained by being in front (IMO sometimes it actually hurts).
I certainly wouldn\'t discount the possibility just because every race didn\'t go wire to wire. By definition, if there is a \"bias\" it is not a guarantee. It is simply a bias or advantage.
I know how fast Consolidator ran, but I will not take him as the favorite (or close) off that race. I let horses that win on the front on wet suspect tracks beat me when they are a short price. I don\'t mind being wrong (and I could very well be) in those cases. Give me a price and I\'ll reconsider. Good luck. :-)
Post Edited (04-12-05 22:28)
the SA surface got rock hard on occasions, usually when it was wet fast (TGJB had some interesting things to say about this). some say consolidator benefited from a hard surface, some disagree... it\'s certainly not foolish to put forward the proposition though.
\"Speed is the universal bias.\" -- Some Guy Somewhere
The track \"may have been speed favoring.\" It \"didn\'t hurt to be on the lead.\" It \"certainly didn\'t hurt to be near the pace that day.\"
Couldn\'t you say this about almost any track on any day of the week? How many days do you look at a track and say, \"wow, the closers really have the edge out there today.\" How can you handicap this way? Maybe there was a bias. Maybe there wasn\'t. My head\'s going to explode.
When the ROTW is at Turfway, that track \"may be speed favoring.\" Gulfstream \"may be inside speed favoring.\" Fair Grounds on Louisiana Derby Day was \"speed favoring.\" Bellamy Road won and \"Aqueduct was probably favoring speed.\"
Hey, I\'ve heard Keeneland favors speed a little too! Churchill Downs is not a track that I\'ve heard this about (as much) but the speed has not exactly done poorly in the Derby the last few years either.
A real bias is pretty rare, but based on what I read from some posters on this board it\'s happening every week and explains almost everything. Maybe.
After this week it will be the same thing -- \"the track favored speed.\" \"Keeneland is a notorious speed favoring track.\" Why bother watching the race? You might as well start putting those posts up now...because I know they\'ll be up there on Sunday regardless of the result.
HP
Chris--
Always respect your posts. However, my opinion on CLOSING ARGUMENT is that his pedigree is chock full of sprinters. Besides SUCCESSFUL APPEAL, CA has speed influences on all sides which includes MR. GREELEY, GROOVY, and CORNISH PRINCE. Not the type of animal I would want to back going a mile and a quarter with 20 in the gate.
WE can look at the Thoros, Beyers, patterns, trainers, etc. All great tools and the best places to start. However, if the horse is not bred to go a mile and a quarter, all of the above factors become moot.
PS:This is not to say that CA will not have a say in the outcome of one of this weekend\'s races.
Good Luck,
Joe B.
HP,
\"Couldn\'t you say this about almost any track on any day of the week? \"
This is my view.
On most days, most tracks give an advantage to speed horses because they can save ground and avoid other traffic issues.
On some days, I think that advantage extends past \"typical/average\".
>How can you handicap this way? Maybe there was a bias. Maybe there wasn\'t. My head\'s going to explode.<
LOL.
I\'m in a different position than some people. I don\'t have to provide a solid \"figure\" that represents performance.
I don\'t have to make a \"top selection\" in a newspaper or forum that others can evaluate.
All I have to do is figure out what price I\'m willing to take on various horses in order to try to net out to long term profits. One of the techniques I use requires that I admit to myself that I can\'t understand everything about every performance and reduce it to a certainty (or close). I form opinions, but realize I could be wrong.
What I try to do is avoid all the \"possible negatives\" and get all the \"possible positive\" on my side.
For example:
Given 2 horses have been running similar figures, I\'d rather have the one that I know for certain ran on an honest track vs. the one that \"may have been helped by a biased surface based on limited evidence\".
If I can get that honest racetrack horse at a better price, that\'s a bet. If the horse that \"may have run on a biased surface\" is a slightly longer price I pass. No one is holding a gun to my head forcing me to bet when I\'m not sure.
There\'s a lot of uncertainty in things like biases, controversial figures, horses unproven at a distance, the impact of pace on time, how a race might develop, etc...
All I try to do is get the highest possible price on horses with few or no \"possible\" negatives and as many \"possible positive\" as possible.
It\'s more or less my way of dealing with my admission of ignorance in some situations instead of forming strong opinions that turn out to be wrong and lose me money.
Class,
You wrote -
\"Given 2 horses have been running similar figures, I\'d rather have the one that I know for certain ran on an honest track vs. the one that \"may have been helped by a biased surface based on limited evidence\".\"
-- In your posts, I haven\'t seen you give ONE example of a horse that \"for certain ran on an honest track.\" Virtually EVERY horse \"may have been helped by a biased surface based on limited evidence\" since you seem to find some kind of possible bias nonsense in EVERY race, EVERY week.
\"There\'s a lot of uncertainty in things like biases, controversial figures, horses unproven at a distance, the impact of pace on time, how a race might develop, etc...\"
-- Why don\'t you try using Thoro-Graph? Seriously. I have not seen any \"winning insights\" whatsoever in any of your posts, and you post A LOT. It would mean something if any of this stuff actually led to you successfully handicapping a race. Reading this board I\'m sure I\'m not the only one wondering when or if you will ever provide anything that leads anyone to cash a ticket.
Over the past three weeks I posted my ROTW picks and hit exactas in two of them. No bias, no pace, no nothing. Maybe there is less \"uncertainty\" just looking at the figures! You must be raking it in with this bias and pace stuff... Add it all up and show us how it works... I\'m passing out from holding my breath.
HP
HP,
\"-- In your posts, I haven\'t seen you give ONE example of a horse that \"for certain ran on an honest track.\" \"
There were three 3YO preps that fall into my \"suspect\" category. The rest of the surfaces were honest.
LA Derby
Wood Memorial
San Felipe
\" Seriously. I have not seen any \"winning insights\" whatsoever in any of your posts, and you post A LOT. \"
All I can say is that I\'ve won money in 7 of the last 9 years playing this way. I had more mixed results for several years before that when I used to bet a lot more short priced horses and saver exactas (that cost me money).
Most horseplayers love the action, so they play lots of races. I pick plenty of shorter priced winners but pass the races because my results indicate that all I\'m doing is spinning money through the windows. I don\'t bet very often even when I identify the most likely winner. It takes a good horse horse at a good price (like Wildcat Heir that I played and spoke about here) to get me to the windows. I also don\'t cash a very high percentage because I\'m not looking for locks. I\'m looking for value and a lot of time that means playing horses with only a 15%-20% chance of winning that I know aren\'t the best horse in the race.
hp:
ch is like a tv. show sitcom,if you dont care for its content...dont watch
1. \"All I try to do is get the highest possible price on horses with few or no \"possible\" negatives and as many \"possible positive\" as possible.\"
2. \"I\'m looking for value and a lot of time that means playing horses with only a 15%-20% chance of winning that I know aren\'t the best horse in the race.\"
These two statements taken together make absolutely no sense. How could horses with \"few or no negatives and a lot of possible positives\" have only a 15-20% chance of winning? I mean it makes NO SENSE, Class.
This is just one example. Here\'s another.
\"I don\'t bet very often even when I identify the most likely winner. It takes a good horse horse at a good price (like Wildcat Heir that I played and spoke about here) to get me to the windows. I also don\'t cash a very high percentage because I\'m not looking for locks.\"
If you don\'t bet very often and you don\'t cash a very high percentage you must hit BOMBS every time you hit to turn an annual profit. What\'s your average mutuel payoff? Do you play exotics? I would guess you don\'t play too many exotics because picking ONE horse to play must be very hard for you, let alone two or three.
I\'d love to hear how you do this. Judging by this last paragraph, you must hit 10-1 to 20-1 shots pretty steady. If you can do this, why don\'t you share your methods, specifically, instead of posting these inane generalities?
This reminds me of another guy who used to post here all the time and he was another wizard who would explain that he \"didn\'t want to hurt his price\" and \"he didn\'t have to give picks.\" So he had A LOT of ideas that had nothing to do with TG and he never demonstrated whether or not they worked. He never laid out a race or said what he thought would happen before the fact either. You were just supposed to take it on faith that he was a winner. I don\'t buy it. Show me! If I can do it, so can you. If you can\'t, I think that says everything anyone needs to know about your abilities.
I think Davidrex is right.
HP
HP,
I don\'t hit a high percentage because I don\'t always bet the best horse in the race.
I haven\'t checked my average price over those years (I still have the data though), but I almost never bet anything less than 7-2. So that should give you some idea.
By positives and negatives, I was referring strictly to some of the subjective things that IMO can\'t be quantified perfectly.
Here\'s my exact thinking on the Blue Grass.
I see and use all the same speed figures as everyone else. I can make the same pattern projections.
However....
I don\'t want to bet a horse whose only big figure came on a wet fast rolled track that might have been carrying speed if he\'s the favorite or close. That\'s because I think horses like that tend to underform their figures/odds compared to similar horses that earned their figures under typcial conditions.
I don\'t want to bet a horse whose only fast route came with a loose lead/slow pace on a \"suspect\" track, against weak horses as the favorite or close. That\'s because I know that a lot of horses like that fall apart when they are tested for the first time.
I don\'t want to bet a highly regarded horse from the Zito barn when his last race was so darn slow - even though I expect better - when he\'s the favorite or close.
Those are all very good horses. I can see why someone could make a good case for any one of them being the most likely winner.
I just wouldn\'t bet any of them at short odds because IMHO they are all potentially flawed relative to their figures.
However, I might consider a horse like Bandini even though I am fairly certain he\'s not the fastest horse, not the most likely winner, and probably doesn\'t have a very high chance of winning.
The reason I might be willing to do so is because I think I have an excellent guage on his ability. He hasn\'t been as fast as the others, but he\'s not that far behind and he earned his figures on legit surfaces against legit quality fields.
I think extremely highly of Pletcher\'s skill at spotting and improving young horses. If he didn\'t think this horse had a good shot, he wouldn\'t be in this race. He would have looked for a softer prep.
I don\'t think the Florida 3YOs are getting as much credit as they deserve based on how they have performed elsewhere and others have performed when they have shipped into FL.
The only thing between me and a bet, is the price. I am trying to figure out how negative I am about the others and how concerned I am about Bandini missing some training. I\'m not sure yet what price will provoke me into making the bet.
At a certain price I will feel that I got compensated for the fact that Bandini is slower coming in because some of the others \"may not\" be as good as they look.
If I do bet and he finishes 4th/5th etc... I will still feel comfortable with the bet.
If one of the others proves that he really is a superstar and that my concerns were unwarranted, I will still feel comfortable with the bet.
That\'s an example of how I think - for better or worse!
Now if the track comes up favoring speed tomorrow........ LOL
Post Edited (04-13-05 13:07)
Class,
So you might bet on Bandini if the price is right. Maybe before the race you can write a definitive sentence like...
\"I will play Bandini to win at 10-1 or more.\"
or
\"I will play Bandini to win and use him under High Limit and Sun King.\"
Using your logic, if I liked Bandini I would probably have to get AT LEAST 15-1, because the only way he can win is if NONE of the faster horses fire (and there are AT LEAST three of them -- probably more) and I would say the odds that Frankel, Zito, etc. will come up completely empty here are pretty long.
Hopefully you can consolidate (no pun intended) this into one coherent sentence before the race. It really isn\'t that hard.
You should have some clue of what price you will take... I know it\'s got to be A LOT better than 7/2! Because...
At 3-1, if you make equal win bets and hit three out of ten races you break about even. That\'s winning at better than a 30% clip.
If you \"don\'t cash a high percentage\" of your bets (your words) your average mutuels have to be MUCH higher than 7/2. I don\'t see how you could even LOOK at a 7/2 shot and make money.
My math isn\'t that great, but if you hit say, 10% of your races, your average mutuel has to be 10-1 to BREAK EVEN. So given EVERYTHING you have written here, if you turn this annual profit playing the way you say you play, I don\'t see how you could be looking at ANYTHING under 10-1 (remember, you hit a pretty small percentage and turn a profit, right?). If you make out playing 4-1 or 5-1 shots, your winning pct. must actually be pretty high...contrary to what you say.
HP
CH-
I\'m sorry but your posts are making me dizzy. In the real world you must be either a lawyer or a purchasing agent. I have never seen so much double speak put into writing as I have in your posts.
NC Tony
HP,
LOL.
7-2/3-1 is the \"minimum\" odds I usually take because my long term records indicate that even when I have a pretty strong opinion, I don\'t win much money on shorter priced horses. I just spin money through the windows. I\'m not that good at seperating out who should be 8-5 vs. who should be 6-5 etc... Sometimes I actually like a horse a lot and think he deserves to be 2-1! So 7-2 is fine. :-)
I\'m thinking maybe 8-1 on Bandini would get me off the sofa. :-)
HP--
You must be very impressed with CH to ask all these questions.
If the guy is keying in on 8-1 shots or better, ever think he may be cashing some nice exactas?
Good Luck,
Joe B.
Joe,
\"You must be very impressed with CH to ask all these questions.\"
Quite the opposite. I\'m asking all the questions because it\'s becoming increasingly obvious to me that CH is full of it.
\"If the guy is keying in on 8-1 shots or better, ever think he may be cashing some nice exactas?\"
Joe, CH didn\'t say ANYTHING about keying in on 8-1 shots... Class said 7/2 was his \"minimum.\" It\'s IMPOSSIBLE to \"not cash a high percentage\" of bets and win playing 7/2, 4-1 or even 5-1. And I mean IMPOSSIBLE!
Here\'s an illustration.
Bandini is 8-1. You play $10 win Bandini and $5 exactas with two of the shorter priced horses OVER Bandini.
Bet is $20.
High Limit wins at 5/2 and Bandini finishes second. The crowd is all over the high profile connections and the exacta pays $28 (which is a decent 14-1!). You get back $70 for a $50 profit. If Bandini wins you get back $80 for a $60 profit. It doesn\'t matter because...
You don\'t cash a \"high percentage\" of your bets. Assuming THIS is the one you cash, and then you lose your next seven $20 bets, and overall, your winning percentage for the day, week, or whatever is a \"not high\" 12%.
This is called going broke. And this is with an 8-1 shot winning!
The ONLY way it\'s mathematically possible to win cashing a \"not high\" pct. of your bets is to BANG LONGSHOTS to win or to get LONGSHOT COMBO exactas. 8-1 winners won\'t do it (you need to hit 12.5% of your bets to break even!), and 8-1 exactas with shorties won\'t do it either. If he starts talking about boxing Bandini with some other longshots then we\'re in business. As I said before, I\'m turning blue holding my breath on this...
He writes -- \"sometimes I actually like a horse a lot and think he deserves to be 2-1! So 7-2 is fine.\"
No, it isn\'t fine. You can\'t play 7/2, hit a \"not high percentage\" of your bets and turn a profit. And you can put in all the :) crap you want. As Anthony Newley sang, it\'s IMPOSSIBLE!
You don\'t have to be a deli man to know baloney.
HP
HP,
I think it\'s pretty obvious you don\'t understand my betting yet. By now I am pretty sure I\'m really testing JB\'s patience. So this will be the last try.
I am looking for overlays just like everyone else. However, historically when I looked for them in the lower odds categories like
5-2 and lower, I didn\'t have much success. I bet a lot of money and made nothing. I think that\'s probably true of a lot of people, they just don\'t keep good enough records to know it.
When I looked for overlays among longer priced horses, I tended to do much better.
Hence the approximate cutoff of 7-2 (on rare occasions I wil take less).
However, the odds I am willing to accept on any individual horse are 100% correlated to my estimate of the horses\'s chances.
If I think 10%, I want 12-1.
If I think 20%, I want 5-1.
If I think 30%, I want 7-2.
And so on.
The net of all the horses I bet do not win a particularly high percentage of the time because it is made up of some low percentage horses, but the odds have compensated on an individual basis.
Class,
I understand perfectly, and you are only making my point, JB\'s exasperation notwithstanding. Corresponding with you I swear I feel like Albert Einstein.
You wrote,
\"However, the odds I am willing to accept on any individual horse are 100% correlated to my estimate of the horses\'s chances.
1. If I think 10%, I want 12-1.
2. If I think 20%, I want 5-1.
3. If I think 30%, I want 7-2.\"
When you say this, I believe you.
1. The horse has a 10% chance of winning and you get 12-1. Let\'s say you are right 10% of the time. Assuming 10 $10 bets and you hit one (10% correct) you are ahead $20. Mazel tov bro.
2. The horse has a 20% chance of winning and you get 5-1. Let\'s say you are right 20% of the time on these. Assuming you make 10 $10 bets and you hit two (20% correct) you are EVEN.
3. The horse has a 30% chance of winning and you get 7/2. Let\'s say you are right...I don\'t know...30% of the time on these (which would make sense given the shorter prices). Assuming you make 10 $10 bets and you hit three (30% correct), guess how you\'re doing?
You started out saying how you \"did not hit a high percentage of your bets?\" Based on your posts I believe you! So if you are indeed turning a profit, you must actually be hitting a higher percentage of them than you think, no?
You MUST be hitting MORE than 30% of your 7/2 shots, MORE than 20% of your 5/1 shots, and MORE than 10% of your 12/1 shots. Otherwise you can\'t turn a profit. Remember Anthony Newley... It\'s IMPOSSIBLE my friend!
So you are either full of it or you are actually wrong and hitting a fairly HIGH percentage of your bets (more than 10, 20 or 30%, respectively)... Judging by your post, you could probably rattle off just how well you do in each odds bracket (you keep records, right?)...
I think I understand you just fine...
HP
HP--
You\'re assuming he wagers the same amount of money for each race he bets.
I can lose 9 $20 win bets (all on 8-1 shots or better) and be down $180 and then hit an 8-1 shot in the last race (which I make my prime bet) with a $200 win ticket.
I leave the track hitting 10% of my bets, have invested $380 and am ahead $1420.
Good Luck,
Joe B.
clss h. must be racings answer to don king. the way he insisently carries on in a benign if somewhat narcissistic conversation about his favorite subject[himself].
he doesnt debate or argue and validify his points,he just keeps coming at you with his chummy rhetoric.im starting to aquire a fondness for his civility. at the same time I think one of the raggie boys is behind this seris of short stories... i kinda like you ch...i\'d like you even more if you stopped turning your cheek and actually defended your ideas[whatever they are]
HP,
If I get 5-1 on horses with a 20% chance of winning I am profiting.
-2
-2
-2
-2
+10 (5-1 pays $12)
____
+2
If I get 7-2 on horses with a 30% chance of winning I am profiting.
-2
-2
+7 (7-2 pay $9)
-2
-2
-2
+7
-2
-2
+7
___
+7
after that lesson in physics...i\'m convinced we have a raggie virus!!!
Joe,
Come on. Obviously I\'m giving examples with equal size units to clarify the math involved. You\'re probably onto something though... CH probably loses his $20 bets and wins his $200 plays. That\'s probably how he turns that annual profit.
HP
davidrex,
\"i\'d like you even more if you stopped turning your cheek and actually defended your ideas[whatever they are]\"
LOL.
The only way subjective things can be defended is at the windows. Unfortunately, some things can be observed but not measured with precision like race time.
He might have some trouble with this math:
\"2. The horse has a 20% chance of winning and you get 5-1. Let\'s say you are right 20% of the time on these. Assuming you make 10 $10 bets and you hit two (20% correct) you are EVEN.\"
Class,
Wow. This is really pathetic.
As I told Joe, I\'m giving an illustration. I\'m not giving you track prices! Yes 5-1 pays $12 at the track but for a math illustration I\'m saying 5-1 is $10. 7/2 is $7 for $2.
If you want to split hairs, use 3/1 and 4/1 for the illustration instead of 7/2 and 5/1. If you want to add that extra few bucks from the pari-mutuel \"round up\" in to give yourself a profit go ahead. That\'s one way to call yourself a winner.
You\'re too much.
HP
You\'re math is way off here HP, 5-1 pays $12 for a $2 bet anywhere, whether its at the track, at the roulette table, or on a football parlay card.
Beyerguy,
That answer you too? Way to nitpick.
HP
Nitpick? That is a huge difference, and could very well be the difference between winning and losing on a regular basis.
You pick 20% winners at 5-1, you can make a ton of money. You pick 20% winners at 4-1, you break even. Hardly nitpicking.
davidrex,
\"at the same time I think one of the raggie boys is behind this seris of short stories... \"
I can\'t prove it, but I subjectively think you are right after this latest exchange.
:-)
Okay Beyerguy, you\'re right and so is CH. He\'s a big winner. He\'s making out like a bandit picking \"not a high percentage\" of 5-1 winners. Does this mean he\'s picking 20% winners in this odds range? 20% sounds like a pretty good clip to me. I guess to you, 20% sounds like \"not a high percentage.\" Who\'s Einstein now? Yeesh.
I said I wasn\'t good at math! Enjoy the rest of the day as the descending sun illustrates the theory of relativity and the speed of light.
HP
When I make a mistake, I just say I screwed up. No big deal. You are the one who made the Einstein statement then screwed up simple math. So what, we all make mistakes. But stop the rationalizing, very childish.
Okay, everybody knock it off. I have to say, David did a good job describing CH, though.
TGJB,
I spend so much time responding to silly comments about something I said it\'s no wonder I\'m having a bad year at the windows. Why have yot been so tolerant? I expected at least one thorough blasting by now. :-)
Since the BG is going to be the ROTW, can you give us an opinion on how Afleet Alex is going to run?
He\'s working like he\'s doing well.
CH-- I have no opinion about what AA will do, although why Ritchey is working him so hard is beyond me. I think I\'m doing a great job of ignoring both you and Friedman, although the provocation in the latter case is extreme.
From the \"Ragozin Insider\" in last week\'s Thoroughbred Times (Free Ragozin figures! And \"Insider\", as in only the thousands of subscribers to that publication and their friends get all the figures run by the top 3yos a few days after they run them): after giving out HF\'s 4 1/2, they say Noble Causeway \"also ran a 4 1/2 largely because he rallied five-wide on the final turn\". As previously discussed, watch the replay yourselves to see where NC was, and whether they should get the same figure.
Now, that article came out a week after the race, and 4 days after I had made an issue of it here, publicly. Meaning, the Ragozin camp made a conscious decision to leave their customers with bad numbers rather than admit a mistake-- that\'s their story, and they\'re sticking to it. Again. So tell me again about those 1/2 point condition moves, and why anyone is supposed to believe anything coming from that source.
Okay, I didn\'t ignore Friedman. So what. At least I\'m not going after that unbelievable post defending half point accuracy by talking about averages. For now, anyway-- I printed it out and might tear it up if I have too much coffee some time.
Right now I\'m going on vacation.
I hear about speed bias all the time, and i think that more often than not there is a perception of a speed bias. I think saving ground is absolutely necessary at certain tracks ie: AQ inner GP main or even Keenland. So on those tracks being on the lead and saving ground is a huge positive; however very good horses overcome anything, and they can win from anywhere. On Aqueduct\'s inner they usually run immature and weak maiden races early in the day and i think in those races you see alot of speed-pop type winners, and i hear it all the time at the various betting locations \"Speed is golden today\", So most bettors get this perception of a speed bias, and when the better races (Allowance etc..)come up the dynamic changes, and the races seem to be run with a more level chance to all.
Beyerguy,
If you make a bet with someone and you say \"I\'ll give you 3-1,\" do you pay them $7.40?
I didn\'t screw up anything and I have nothing to rationalize. Move the numbers around a little to make it fit the 10%, 20% and 30% model. I think you\'re smart enough to know exactly what I meant.
If you and CH are happy saying, \"no wait, I make $12 at 5-1 so HP is wrong,\" I don\'t think you were really interested in what I had to say anyway.
HP
I really didn\'t know what you meant. I am always interested in what people have to say. I love reading handicapping talk, and especially those that don\'t agree with me. You don\'t learn much talking to people who all think the same way.
Where I am confused is this: a 5-1 can pay between $12 and 13.80, or a profit of $10 and 11.80. The $12 was the minimum 5-1 can pay. In reality, hitting 20% of 5-1 bets is going to make you even more profit because most will pay above $12.
Beyerguy,
I don\'t think you read this thread. You\'re getting bogged down in the details of the math (which by the way, makes perfect sense if you stopped insisting on casino/track payouts and just stuck with 5-1=$10 like a straight-up bet).
Class is NOT HITTING 20% of his bets, nor does he CONTEND that he does. He says he \"hits not a high percentage of bets.\" 20% is a fairly high percentage.
So what you say is true, but DOES NOT APPLY to CH. What you are saying is true, but totally besides the point!
Maybe you should read the thread. Or not.
HP
I have read the thread.
I don\'t know CH, don\'t know what percentage of bets he hits.
\"2. The horse has a 20% chance of winning and you get 5-1. Let\'s say you are right 20% of the time on these. Assuming you make 10 $10 bets and you hit two (20% correct) you are EVEN.\"
This is wrong. Whether CH hits 20% or not wasn\'t part of this statement. If anyone, not just CH, hits 20% at 5-1, they are doing quite well. THEY ARE NOT EVEN. IF I bet $2 10 times on 5-1 shots, I have bet $20. If I cash 2 of them, I am returned a MINIMUM of $24, and possibly $27.60. It doesn\'t matter what form the payoff is posted, or even what game I am playing. I\'m sure you know this by now, so I really don\'t know what the argument is about anymore.
You just can\'t imagine, for the sake of the example, that 5-1 pays $10?
As I said earlier, if it makes you happy, lower the odds in the example to 4-1.
The WHOLE POINT of the example is that you actually have to hit a fair percentage of your bets to BREAK EVEN.
AT 4-1, YOU HAVE TO HIT 20% OF YOUR BETS TO BREAK EVEN.
I bet you still don\'t know what I\'m talking about.
HP
I know what you are talking about, but 5-1 never, ever pays $10. Why would I imagine that?
Of course, as you state, the lower the odds you demand, the higher percentage you need to hit. CH said that initially, and you basically called him stupid in so many words.
He showed a sliding scale where the lower the odds, the higher win percentage he demanded. That is what started this in the first place. Talk about coming full circle.
You\'re too much. He said a lot of things. You decided to pick this out. I didn\'t call him stupid. I\'m saying he can\'t win hitting a low % of his bets, unless he\'s only playing longshots (which is true). You are focusing on this math and ignoring the larger context of what we were talking about. Have it your way. 5-1 pays $12. You\'re a sharp cookie.
HP,
I checked my results last night. 17% of all the horses I bet since 1996 won.
17% is a fair clip. I guess you can do whatever math it is to demonstrate that you\'ve got to hit an average of 4-1 there (assuming equal units bet) to break even, so your average is 5-1 or better. If I\'m wrong shoot me. Maybe you hit a lot of the 10-1\'s when you bet more on them. That\'s not what you said, but what the hell...
In any case, you manage to say completely contradictory things, often in the same post. I\'ve given plenty of examples above.
Everyone else is probably tired of this by now.
HP